













G , . o ^ G 

V ft- <>* fe u> *t* 






















^ 






■<$• 


















0° 



.& 



r$ ^ V* 


















\ 6 °^ 

0? 












,0v- 



















A.V . °^ *••• A. V "^ <V °^ *•-« 



V 



o. 



,0' 









A, 









% 



v 

<<Jv c o " " * <£ 






:X* ^ 









1 * V 





















•^ 

c » * G * O^ • l ' ' * O 









V 






o 






"V 









-*■ 






-,- »<» 



a ,V 






cv 



!**• 









V 1 : ' *°° 






^ cr 



»1'°* ^ 



\* 






A HISTORY OF 
UNIVERSITY REFORM 

FROM 1800 A.D. TO THE PRESENT TIME 

WITH SUGGESTIONS TOWARDS A COMPLETE 

SCHEME FOR THE UNIVERSITY 

OF CAMBRIDGE 



BY 



A. I. TILLYARD, M.A., 

St. John's College, Cambridge 



Cambridge : 

W. Heffer and Sons Ltd. 

1913 



Y, 



v*4 



<2^ 









PREFACE. 

A few words of explanation may be given as to how 
this book came to be written. In July, 1907, Bishop Gore 
raised a discussion in the House of Lords on University 
Reform, and so brought the question prominently forward. 
I spent the summer of that year in thinking out and 
writing down my own ideas on it. In October an outline 
of them was published in The Cambridge Independent 
Press and also in the now defunct London daily paper, 
The Tribune. It then occurred to me that it might be 
of advantage if an account of the views held by those 
who had advocated reform in the past, and of the main 
changes effected by legislation, could be put into the 
hands of the public. The present volume is the result. 
I have discovered to my great satisfaction how little 
originality there was in my suggestions. The germs of 
the chief of them had been in print for many years, 
though at the time I did not know it. 

The task of writing the book has not been easy, 
because two classes of persons have had to be borne in 
mind— those who know Oxford and Cambridge from 
within, and those who, though interested in education, 
have never been through either the one or the other. 
To give this latter class full explanations on every point 
of difficulty as it arose in connexion with two very 
complex institutions would have required a separate 



VI PREFACE. 

volume, but an effort has been made to meet their case. 
It is for their benefit that the introductory chapter has 
been compiled, and if the unacademical reader will study 
that carefully and then go forward in patience, he will 
find things falling gradually into their places, and ought 
to finish with a fairly good conception both of the history 
of the Universities and also of their present condition. 

A further word of explanation may be given of 
my own particular standpoint. It has been my fortune 
ever since the Technical Instruction Act of 1889 to be 
associated with the public administration of Secondary 
Education. The question therefore which interests 
me most is how the ancient Universities can best be 
fitted into our present educational system. I have not 
attempted to chronicle all the many internal changes 
which Oxford and Cambridge have brought about by 
their own action, but have sought rather to trace the 
course which criticism, more or less detached, has taken, 
and to tell of the reforms which have been effected by the 
external action of Parliament. I may add that though I 
have taken a degree at Cambridge and have lived for 
more than forty years within the statutory mile and a 
half of Great St. Mary's Church, I have never held 
any University or College office. To that extent I have 
written as an outsider. As regards Oxford I am an out- 
sider altogether. There is no possibility of concealing 
my consequent shortcomings from the initiated, and I 
crave their indulgence accordingly. 

The suggestions towards a complete scheme of reform 
for the University of Cambridge will, I trust, not be 



PREFACE. Vll 

looked upon as unpardonably presumptuous, because a 
complete scheme seems now the one thing needful. 
Legislation in 1854 and in subsequent years proceeded 
on practical English lines, that is to say it dealt with 
obvious abuses and deficiencies, and avoided as far as 
possible decisions on questions of principle. But the 
obvious abuses are nearly all gone. Both the University 
and the Colleges are trying to do their best, and if the 
result is not all that could be desired, it is because they 
are struggling with a bad system. If Parliament is 
prepared only to deal with abuses, it is questionable 
whether it is worth its while interfering. What is 
wanted is that reformers should have an ideal and see 
how far Oxford and Cambridge can be brought up to it. 
Are there not still, in Mark Pattison's words, some 
" University men who betray rather an impression that 
something should be done, than a reasoned conviction as 
to what that something is " ? If my suggestions do no 
more than provoke criticism and so help to clarify opinion, 
they will not have been put forward in vain. 

A. I. TILLYARD. 

Fordfield, Cambridge, 
June 23rd, 1913. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER I. 
INTRODUCTORY'. 

Legal definition of the Universities— Their earliest form— Origin 
of— Mullinger's picture of in 1150 A. D.— Youthful undergradu- 
ates—Arts and Faculties— Degrees— Latin and Greek — Teach- 
ing and Examinations — The Professoriate — Regents and Non- 
Regents— The Chancellor— The Vice-Chancellor— The Proctors 
— A picture of Convocation— The foundation of the Colleges- 
New College and King's College— The idea of a College- 
Scholars— Fellows— Masters— College Statutes — The rule of 
study— The rule of life -Visitors — Growth of the Collegiate 
system— The Elizabethan Revolution — The Caput Senatus — 
Action of James the First— The Laudian Statutes — Their 
result — Goldwin Smith's statement— Vicissitudes of fortune — 
Effects of the Reformation— The Restoration and after- 
Cambridge in 1800— Oxford in 1800 ----- Pages 1-18 

CHAPTER II. 

The Beginnings of Criticism. 

Cardinal Newman's account — -First attack by the Edinburgh Review 
— Espriella's " Letters from England " — Review of La Place's 
"Mecanique Celeste" — Review of Strabo — Review of Edge- 
worth's "Essays on Professional Education" — Copleston's 
Reply— Mr. T. E. Kebbel's views — Criticism thereof — Copleston's 
account of the Oxford Examinations — Dr. Jebb's account of 
the Cambridge Examinations - - 19-36 

CHAPTER III. 

The Second Attack by the EDINBURGH REVIEW. 

Sir William Hamilton at Oxford — His Articles and Appendix — 
Encounter with Whewell— Analysis of Hamilton's Article of 
June, 1831 — Employment of the historical method — The 
University of Oxford — The Colleges — The Oxford System 
de jure — The Professors — The Tutorial System — The System 
de facto — The transition from the legal to the illegal system — 
Effected by the Colleges— The action of Laud— The Remedy— 
Reply and Counter-reply — Admission of Dissenters— The 
Appendix— Oxford as it is — Oxford as it might be— The ends 
of a University — Things primary— Things secondary — Action 
in the House of Lords— Action in the House of Commons — 
Mark Pattison's criticism of Hamilton — Goldwin Smith's views 
— Hamilton's charge of illegality — Dean Peacock's account — 
Hamilton's merits — He is the Father of University Reform — 
First hint of the University Extension movement - - - 37-68 



X TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

CHAPTEE IV. 

University v. Colleges (Cambridge). 

Cardinal Newman on the controversy — Sir Charles Lyell— His 
" Travels in North America " — Incidental attack on the College 
system— Science exiled from the Universities — Criticism of 
Whewell — Whewell replies to Lyell— Opposes a Royal Com- 
mission — A Cambridge pamphlet, "The Next Step" — 
Co-operation between Colleges and University desirable — 
Wratislaw's "Observations on the Cambridge system" — 
Suggestion of the Common University Fund — College system 
corrupt and exclusive — Donaldson upholds Hamilton and 
Wratislaw — Condemns subordination of University to Colleges 
— Higher standard for admission necessary .... 69-82 

CHAPTER V. 

University v. Colleges (Oxford). 

Professorial Lecture v. Tutorial Class— Copleston's view — 
Hamilton's view — Pusey and H. H. Vaughan— Bonamy Price's 
first pamphlet — Excessive labour imposed on Tutors — Best men 
leave the University — No provision for learning — A scheme 
propounded — Bonamy Price's second pamphlet — What are 
University requirements ? — The best men still leaving — The 
promotion of Research — Unsatisfactory position of the Pro- 
fessors — And of College Tutors— University education in the 
hands of young men — Teaching and fees should belong to the 
University — A Graduated Professoriate — Tutorial functions 
to be left to the Colleges — Newman's verdict — University has 
no jurisdiction over the Colleges — Want of Entrance Examina- 
tions— Goldwin Smith's view — Mark Pattison's view - - 83-99 

CHAPTER VI. 

The Royal Commission of 1850. 

Results of fifty years agitation — Spread of Competitive Examina- 
tions — Their origin — Mr. Christie's motions in 1844 and 1845 — 
Mr. Hey wood's motion in 1850 — Prime Minister announces 
issue of Royal Commission— Opposition by Cambridge Residents 
— Action by New College and King's College — The Oxford 
Commissioners — Their reception — Recommendations on Univer- 
sity Teaching — Restoration of the Professorial system — 
Fellowships — University Government — Matriculation — The 
Cambridge Commissioners — University Government — Division 
of Tuition — General Council of Studies— Special Boards of 
Studies — New Professorships — College Contributions — Salaries 
of Professors — Appointment of Professors — Recommendations 
as to the Colleges — An Executive Commission — Cost of a Univer- 
sity Course — Non-Collegiate System rejected — Affiliated Halls — 
Religious Tests — University Library— Concluding remarks — 
Difference between Oxford and Cambridge Reports — Far- 
reaching nature of Cambridge Report 100-132 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. XI 

CHAPTER VII. 
The University Acts of 1854 and 1856. 

Change of Government— Lord Palmerston's Letter— Appointment 
of Syndicate at Cambridge— Mr. Gladstone frames the Oxford 
Bill— The idea of an Executive Commission— Lord John Russell 
introduces the Bill— His Speech— Disappointment of the 
Nonconformists— The Second Reading— Proceedings in Com- 
mittee — Amendments carried against the Government — The 
Bill in the House of Lords— Preamble of Act— Hebdomadal 
Council— Congregation — Mark Pattison on the Heathcote 
Amendment— Private Halls— Their failure— Colleges to frame 
new Statutes— And to contribute to the University— Partial 
Abolition of Tests— The Cambridge University Bill— Introduced 
by Mr. Bouverie— His Speech — Bill in Committee — House of 
Lords Stage— Royal Assent — The Executive Commission- 
Chief Clauses of the Act— Results of the two Acts— Mark 
Pattison's criticisms — Their comparative failure— Change in 
the character of the agitation 138-161 



CHAPTER VIII. 
1856-1871. 

Mark Pattison's " Suggestions "—Of Legislative Interference— A 
State-appointed Chancellor— The Hebdomadal Council— Congre- 
gation— Convocation — The Vice-Chancellor— A Financial Board 
— Centralised management of College property — Costliness of 
University education — Scholarships and Exhibitions — Un- 
attached Students — The true economy — Fellowships — The 
general education position — What University Reform is — The 
organisation of Science— The reformed College— The German 
model — The revival of the Faculties — Law — Historical Studies 
— Amalgamation of Colleges— The Faculty of Arts — The 
Graduated Professoriate — The Pass Examinations — The 
Honours Examinations — The existing system of Oxford 
Education — Division between General and Special Studies — 
Training of Teachers — Length of Terms— The University 
course in detail — Pattison's scheme not practical but ideal — 
Goldwin Smith's "Reorganisation of Oxford University" — Re- 
jects Pattison's ideal — The Fellowship system — Headships — 
Teaching by University and Colleges combined — Division of 
labour between them — Revival of the Faculties — Abolition of 
Pass Examinations — An Entrance Examination— Congregation 
— The Hebdomadal Council — The Vice-Chancellor — Delegacies 
— Control of education by the Universities — Visitors — The State 
and the Universities — Points of agreement between Pattison 
and Goldwin Smith 162-197 



xii TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER IX. 

The Legislation of the Seventies. 

First attempt to abolish Tests— Subsequent attempts— Effects ot 
the Acts of 1954 and 1856— Lord Derby's Speech in 1854— The 
Bill of 1870— Lord E. Fitzmaurice's Speech— Bill of 1871— 
Proceedings in the Commons— In the Lords— Lord Salisbury's 
amendment — The Bill carried— Preamble of the Act— The 
Operative Clause— Royal Commission of 1872— Mr. Gladstone's 
Letter — The Commissioners— Cambridge Memorandum to Mr. 
Gladstone— The Conservatives take office— Mark Pattison's 
conjectural history of Lord Salisbury's Bill — Lord Salisbury's 
Speech on the Oxford University Bill in 1876— Dr. Tait's Speech 
— Proceedings in the Lords — University of Cambridge Bill in 
Commons— Both Bills withdrawn— The Joint Bill of 1877— 
Introduced in Commons— Amendments in Committee — Royal 
Assent — Preamble of the Act — The Executive Commissions- 
Clauses 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 44, 52, 53, 54— Effects of the Act— Mr. 
Arthur Gray's description — Abolition of Clerical Fellowships — 
The new Statutes— Terms — College Contributions — Common 
University Fund— The Financial Board — Special Boards of 
Studies— General Board of Studies ------ 198-232 



CHAPTER X. 

The Latest Suggestions from Oxford and Cambridge. 

Lord Curzon's "Principles and Methods of University Reform" — 
Introductory Chapter — Nine classes of suggestions— Constitu- 
tion of the University — The Council — Congregation— Convoca- 
tion — The Admission of poor men — Needs of the Working- 
Classes— The Non-Collegiate system— Hostels— Working men's 
Colleges— The Poor of other classes— Cost of living in Colleges- 
Fees and Dues— Scholarships and Exhibitions — A Redistri- 
bution scheme — Fellowships— University Examinations — The 
Pass Men — A Business education — Relations of the Colleges and 
the University — Educational relations — Growing strength of 
University — Colleges still dominate University — Boards of 
Faculties — Proposed reforms — Executive Machinery — Vice- 
Chancellor — University Staff — Encouragement of Research and 
of Advanced Study— Summary— The latest suggestions from 
Cambridge— Memorial of 1909 to the Council— Reconstitution of 
Electoral Roll — Functions of Senate and Electoral Roll — The 
Council's Report — Rejection of its recommendations - - 233-263 

CHAPTER XI. 

The Financial Resources of Oxford and Cambridge. 

Report of 1852 here defective — Royal Commission Report, 1874 — 
Origin of University and College endowments — Trusts — Lands 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. xiii 

— House Property — Tithe and other Rent-charges — Stocks and 
Shares — Other properties — Income of the Universities and the 
Colleges— External — Internal — Their Expenditure — Cambridge 
University Chest, 1883 and 1913— Common University Fund — 
Gross Corporate Income of Colleges, 1883 and 1913 — Fluctu- 
ations in Land, Houses and Tithe — Imperfect College returns 
— The corresponding Oxford statistics — The Quarterly Review — 
"A Plea for Cambridge " — Extension of Studies at Cambridge — 
Corporate Income of Colleges — Heavy Expenditure on Estates 
— The same at Oxford— Headships— Fellowships— Scholarships 
— Tuition Fund — Balance — University Income and Expendi- 
ture — Lord Curzon's Chapter VII— University Accounts partial 
— University Balance - sheet — Colleges Balance - sheet — The 
Published Accounts — College Contributions — College Financial 
Administration — Management of College Estates — Financial 
Policy of the University — Suggested Board of Finance — Statute 
establishing the same 264-291 



CHAPTER XII. 

Suggestions for a Scheme of Reform for the University 
of Cambridge. 

Section I. 
Definition of University Reform— Its three branches — A Problem 
in Federalism — Mark Pattison's objection examined — Antici- 
pated resistance of the Colleges— Encouragement from the 
progress of events— Opinion at Oxford — Examination of the 
Collegiate System — Numbers and resources of the Cambridge 
Colleges— Disparity in size and wealth— Competition for entries 
—Proportion of Honours to Matriculations— Proportion of Poll 
Degrees to Matriculations — Mr. Venn's figures — Number of 
First Classes, 1898-1907— Great differences between the Colleges 
— Influence of Athletics — Differences in tone and temper — 
Fluctuations in numbers— Difficulties of a small College — 
Multiplicity of Offices— Co-operation between the Colleges — 
The essence of the College System — Lies in its Tutorial and 
Domestic functions — Administrative work of the Colleges — 
Centralisation of administration— Bursars — The Colleges as 
land owners— Scattered College farms— College sentiment 
adverse— Lord Curzon's picture — The Times on Oxford College 
estates — The economic facts— House property — A Central 
Board needed— Stewards — A like suggestion — College standards 
of expenditure— Provision in the Act of 1877 — Public Auditing 
of Accounts — Depreciation of investments — The Organisation 
of Teaching — The Poll men — The Honours men— Existing 
division of teaching between the University and the Colleges — 
A Lecture List analysed — Report of the Cambridge University 
Reform Committee on present system — Increasing co-operation 
between the Colleges — Additional powers for the General 



x iv TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

Board of Studies and Special Boards of Studies— Reform of 
these bodies— Tutorial work of Colleges not to be touched- 
Grouping of the Colleges — Authorities for such a step- 
Clause 22 of the Act of 1877— How it might be given effect to— 
A Scheme of Grouping— The University point of view— Training 
of Teachers— A career at Oxford or Cambridge— The Fellow- 
ship system— Its cost— Its history— Effect of the Acts of 1855 
and 1856— Prize Fellowships — Embody principle of emula- 
tion — Their disadvantages — Decrease in their number- 
Career Scholarships as a substitute— Fellowships as payment 
for College work— As Pensions— For Research— Examinations 
for Fellowships— The awarding of Fellowships— The title only 
to be retained — A career for Teaching — Position of Masters — 
Elasticity of the Federal principle— An appeal to the Colleges. 

Section II. 
University Organisation — The Chancellor— The Vice-Chancellor — 
The Council of the Senate — Ex officio members — The Electoral 
Roll— Proposals of the Reform Committee and the Council — 
Plan for keeping the Universities in touch with national life — 
Limitation in numbers — Power of initiative — Anomalous rela- 
tions between University and Colleges — The Senate— Diffi- 
culties of the Reform Commitee — Senate impossible as govern- 
ing body — The Suspensory Veto — Solution of Women's Degrees 
difficulty. 

Section III. 
The Universities and National Education — Entries from 1850 to the 
present time — Slow rate of progress — Increase in subjects taught 
— In teachers — In buildings — Expense the obstacle — Statement 
of the Reform Committee — Criticism of it — Scholarships and 
Exhibitions — The actual awards — Helping poverty — Failure of 
Hostels and the Non-Collegiate System — How to reduce 
expenses — Scholarships a necessity — How and when to award 
them — Probable opposition by the Colleges — Necessity for a 
University Entrance Examination — Previous Examination 
becoming an Entrance Examination — Cambridge Memorial on 
the subject — Action at Oxford — Examinations — Examiners not 
trained — Dean Merivale's views — Board of Examinations 
required — Defects and contradictions of present Triposes — 
Unrestricted competition has been modified — Overloaded 
Examinations— The Classical Tripos — The Law Tripos — The 
multiplicity of Examinations — Principles of Examination 
Reform — Many University graduates still uneducated — Sir 
Clifford Allbutt's statement — Pass Examinations — A sugges- 
tion — Degrees— Advanced Studies — The Endowment of Research 
— Board of Advanced Study and Research required — The Library 
Question — Necessity for a Royal Commission — Intentions of 
Parliament must be carried out 292-380 

Summary of Suggestions 381-384 



CORRECTIONS. 

p. 87 (note), for pp. 13-14 read pp. xiii-xiv. 

p. 89, line 16, after pamphlet insert entitled Oxford 
Reform. 

p. 94 (note), for Historical Studies read Historical 
Sketches. 

p. 145, line 32, insert quotation marks after canvas. 

p. 203, last line, for Ward read Wood. 

p. 228, line 30, for to, define read to define. 

p. 289, line 28, for Oxford University Gazette read Oxford 
University Gazette. 

p. 297 (note), for University Calendar read University 
Calendar. 

p. 345, line 26, insert comma after Vice-Chancellor. 

p. 362, line 29, insert comma after Classics. 

p. 363, line 23, insert comma after Non-Regent House. 



CHAPTER I. 

INTRODUCTORY. 

" The University of Cambridge," says the Report of 
the Royal Comniission of 1850, " is a lay corporation, 
possessing various privileges under Charters of the Crown 
and Acts of Parliament or by prescription. The earliest 
Royal Letters Patent which can now be traced as 
authentic are of the reign of King Henry the Third. 1 
These, however, do not found the University, but recog- 
nise it as already existing, with an organised constitution 
and regular form. Other Letters and Charters were 
granted from time to time by subsequent monarchs, of 
which the most ample and the most important is the 
Charter granted by Queen Elizabeth in the third year of 
her reign (dated April 26, 1561),' 2 confirming former and 
conferring new privileges. In the thirteenth year of the 
same reign (June 7, 1571) an Act of Parliament was 
passed whereby it was enacted that ' the Chancellor, 
Masters and Scholars of the University of Cambridge ' 
should be incorporated with perpetual succession under 
that title; and that the Letters Patent of the Queen, made 
in the third year of her reign, and also all other Letters 
Patent by any of Her Majesty's progenitors or prede- 
cessors, should be good in law to all intents." 3 

The Oxford Report of the Royal Commission of 1850 
says of this same reign of Henry III., " At that time the 
University of Oxford was, we may almost say, the chief 
charity school of the poor, and the chief grammar-school 

hooper gives the following account of the earliest documents. 
" It seems that at this time (a.d. 1231), the ruling powers of the Univer- 
sity experienced considerable inconvenience from the want of authority 
to punish offenders against academic discipline, from the claims of 
disorderly persons to the character of scholars in order more safely to 
pursue their malpractices, and from the exorbitant sums demanded by 
the townspeople for the rent of the hostels in which the scholars lived. 
In order to remedy these grievances the King issued four several writs, 
all tested at Oxford, the 3rd of May in this year." — Annals of Cambridge, 
Vol I., p. 41. 

2 The Charter is given in Cooper, Annals of Cambridge, Vol. II., 
pp. 165-168. 

! lb. Vol. II., pp. 274-276. b 



2 UNIVERSITY REFOKM. 

in England, as well as the great place of education for 
Students of Theology, of Law and of Medicine. The 
oldest of the great Public Schools was not yet founded. 
The Inns of Court and the Schools of Medicine had no 
existence, and many students from foreign Universities 
thought their education incomplete until they had visited 
the most celebrated seat of English learning." Though 
the exact origin of Oxford and Cambridge is thus not 
precisely known, there is not the mystery about it which 
is generally imagined. "The constitution of the Univer- 
sity of Paris formed the model on which that of Oxford 
and that of Cambridge were formed ; the course of study, 
the collegiate system, even the regulations of the 
Sorbonne, were imitated with scrupulous fidelity." 1 
Some time then during the 12th century arose these 
ancient institutions whose history we have begun to 
trace. 

Oxford and Cambridge were thus Schools and Uni- 
versities in one, open to all comers. " If we picture 
to ourselves some few hundred students, of all ages from 
early youth to complete manhood, mostly of very slender 
means, looking forward to the monastic or the clerical 
life as their future avocation, lodging among the towns- 
folk, and receiving such accommodation as inexperienced 
poverty might be likely to obtain at the hands of practised 
extortioners, resorting to one large building, the grammar 
schools, or sometimes congregated in the porches of their 
respective Masters' houses, and there receiving such 
instruction in Latin as a reading from Terence, Boethius 
or Orosius, eked out by the more elementary rules from 
Priscian or Donatus, would represent— we shall probably 
have grasped the main features of a Cambridge course 
when Irnerius began to lecture at Bologna, Vacarius 
at Oxford, and when Peter Lombard compiled the 
Sentences" 2 (i.e. about 1150 A.D.). 

Reference is made in this extract to the early age, 
it was fourteen or even under, at which undergraduates 
entered. 3 There was the more necessity for this because 

1 Mullinger, The University of Cambridge, Vol. I., p. 67. 
2 lb. Vol. I., p. 341. 
3 " In the old matriculation books at Cambridge, many students have 
' Imp.' i.e. Impubes written after their names, showing they were under 



INTRODUCTORY. 3 

a long course lay before them. To begin with there were 
"arts" to be learned to the mystical number of seven. 
These were divided into two courses, the Trivium of three 
— Grammar {i.e. Latin), Logic and Rhetoric, and the 
Quadrivium of four — Arithmetic, Geometry, Astronomy 
and Music. To each Art a year's study was supposed 
to be given, so that the seven Arts took seven years 
to finish. To the Arts there were added later the three 
Faculties properly so-called of Theology, Law and 
Medicine. Theology took twelve years, Law and 
Medicine six each, so that the whole University course 
occupied from thirteen to nineteen years. Certificates 
of proficiency were awarded at four stages, and were 
called Degrees, or steps, gradus, because they marked 
the point at which a student had arrived. At the end 
of three years the student could become a Bachelor of 
Arts, Baccalaureus Artium, at the end of seven years 
a Master of Arts, Magister Artium, or to give the 
process in more detail, "the following were the 
successive stages which marked the progress of the Arts 
student : that of the Sophister, or disputant in the 
Schools,— of the Bachelor of Arts, eligible in turn to 
give subsidiary or cursory lectures, — of the incepting 
Master in Arts who has received his licence to teach in 
any University in Europe — and of the Regent Master of 
Arts who lectured for a definite term as an instructor 
appointed by the University." ' " The possession of a 
Degree," the same writer also points out, " was originally 
nothing else than the possession of a diploma to exercise 
the function of teaching; a right which at a later 
period was equally recognised as a duty. The Bachelors 
expounded the Sentences (of Peter Lombard) and the 
Scriptures, the Doctors and Masters taught systemati- 
cally in the Schools ; but all those who had gained the 
degree of Licentiate, Master or Doctor were held bound 
to devote a certain period to imparting again the learn- 

fourteen." Venn, Oxford and Cambridge Matriculations, p. 5. This 
practice of early entry continued to a surprisingly late date. Vicesimus 
Knox in his Liberal Education published in 1781 writes, "Boys should 
not be sent to the University so young as they often are. It is really 
cruel to let a boy of fifteen be precipitated into drunkenness and 
debauchery." Works, Vol. IV., p. 142. 

1 Mullinger, Vol. I., p. 358. 



4 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

ing they had acquired" l The preliminary studies, the 
examinations, the licence to teach thus followed in a 
natural order. When a student had completed his Arts 
course, he was free to proceed to one of the Faculties, in 
which there were also two steps, Bachelor and Doctor. 

In passing it may be remarked that Oxford from 
the first showed a preference for the Trivium and Cam- 
bridge for the Quadrivium, and that this distinction 
can be traced even to the present day. The language of 
instruction was Latin, the then universal tongue of 
science and learning, so that students coming from 
abroad were no strangers as far as their speech was 
concerned. Greek there was, broadly speaking, none. 
For that and for the classical education which has 
prevailed so long in our Public Schools and Universities, 
we are indirectly indebted to the Turks. As these 
barbaric invaders pressed more hardly upon the Eastern 
Empire centred at Constantinople, the Greek scholars 
retreated to the West carrying the literature of Greece 
with them. Classical learning penetrated these remote 
islands, took a hold of Oxford which it has never relin- 
quished, and disputed with Mathematics the mastery of 
Cambridge. 

The teaching in the early times was necessarily oral, 
as there were no printed books and manuscripts were 
rare and dear. It was either explanatory or dialectical, 
the latter method being the favourite. Every possible 
point was thrown into a quaestio and then discussed 
2)ro. and con. Examinations were oral also, and these 
again took the form of disputations or discussions, 
the defensive and offensive parts in them being called 
respectively " responsions " and " opponencies." The 
examiner held the balance even between the disputants 
and controlled the arguments so they did not wander 
into devious paths. Hence such terms as " Responsions " 
and "Moderations" at Oxford and "Moderator" (or 
Examiner) and "Wrangler" which still survive in the 
Mathematical Tripos at Cambridge. This system of 
teaching and examination had its drawbacks. " It was 
undoubtedly from the prevalence of this method of 
teaching that disputation became the besetting vice of 

1 lb. Vol. I., p. 78. 



INTRODUCTORY. 5 

the age. ' They dispute,' says Vives in his celebrated 
treatise, ' before dinner, at dinner and after dinner ; in 
public and in private ; at all places, and at all times.' " x 
So difficult is it to hit on the best methods either of 
imparting or testing knowledge. 

At the beginning and for some centuries, the Uni- 
versity gave its own instruction, in its own public 
schools, by means of its Masters of Arts and superior 
Graduates. The principle of the University doing its own 
teaching was extended and confirmed by the establishment 
of the Professoriate. The earliest foundation at Cam- 
bridge was that of the Lady Margaret Professorship of 
Divinity which dates from 150'2. Lady Margaret, Countess 
of Richmond, was the mother of Henry VII., and to this 
munificent lady Cambridge owes not only its first 
Professorship but two of its Colleges, Christ's and 
St. John's. King Henry VIII. followed in 1540 with the 
five Regius Professorships, of Divinity, Civil Law, Physic, 
Hebrew and Greek. He endowed them with what was 
thejt an ample income — £40 a year, a sum which is 
still paid from the imperial Exchequer, less £7 2s. 8d. 
mysteriously intercepted on the way. 

The University was originally a self-governing unity, 
an association of teachers united by mutual interest, 
divided into two Houses, that of the Regents, who were 
actually engaged in teaching, and of the Non-Regents, 
who had passed through the office of teacher. At the 
head was a Chancellor elected for two years by the 
Regents, who might on extraordinary occasions be con- 
tinued in office for a third year. He summoned Convo- 
cations or Congregations of both the Houses to consult 
together for the common good and general interests of 
the University. No Graces, i.e. legislative proposals, could 
be proposed or passed without his assent. He was a King 
with a real power of veto. He was not allowed to be 
absent from the University for more than a month while 
the lectures or readings of the Masters of Arts were going 
on,. though a Vice-Chancellor might be appointed by the 
Regents from year to year to relieve him of some portion 
of his duties. In later times the Graces before they 
were submitted to the general body or Senate were 

1 Mullinger, Vol. I., p. 361. 



6 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

submitted to the discussion and approbation of a Council 
or Caput Senatus, which was usually appointed at the 
beginning of each Congregation. 

The two Proctors were after the Chancellor and 
the Vice-Chancellor the most important administrative 
officers in the University. They were chosen annually 
on the 10th of October by the Regents. They regulated 
absolutely the times and modes of reading (i.e. teaching), 
disputations and inceptions in the public schools, and 
the public ceremonies of the University ; they super- 
intended the markets with a view to the supply of wine, 
bread, and other necessaries to the undergraduates at 
reasonable rates; they had charge of the University 
finances ; they could suspend a gremial, or resident, from 
his vote and a non-gremial from his degree ; they collected 
the votes and announced the decisions of the House of 
Regents whose peculiar officers they were, they examined 
the candidates for degrees (Questionists) by themselves 
or their deputies ; they superintended or controlled all 
public disputations and exercises, either by themselves 
or by their officers the Bedels ; they administered the 
oaths of admission to all degrees, and they alone were 
competent to confer the important privileges of the 
Regency. 1 

We can thus picture another scene. The Chancellor 
has decided upon a Grace. The bell sounds and the 
Senate or Convocation assembles, the Chancellor attended 
by his Bedels presiding. The Caput approves the Grace. 
The two Houses vote upon it, the Proctors taking the 
votes in the Regent House, the Scrutators (appointed 
for the purpose at each Congregation) taking them in 
the Non-Regent House. Both bodies approve and the 
Grace is forthwith added to the Statute law of the Uni- 
versity. Non-residents had no part or lot in this 
arrangement. There was no post wherewith to acquaint 
them with the intended proceedings of the residents, nor 
railroads to bring them up to the scene of action. 

The most momentous event in the history of Oxford 
and Cambridge was the foundation of the Colleges, yet 
none saw its significance, so quietly and naturally did it 

1 See Peacock, Observations on the Statutes, pp. 15, 24, quoted in 
Mullinger, Vol. I., pp. 140-144. 



INTRODUCTORY. 7 

come about. The youthful students lodged with the 
townspeople, or in hostels kept for them by the graduates. 
Neither plan worked satisfactorily. The students com- 
plained of the exactions of the townspeople. The towns- 
people retorted disagreeably of the disorderly conduct of 
the students and of the non-payment of their just and 
lawful debts. Thus began the age-long quarrel between 
" town " and " gown." The hostels too, so it was alleged, 
were not always what they should have been, in that they 
were conducted for the benefit of the Heads rather than 
for that of the Students. Above all it was necessary to 
help the poor and struggling members of the University 
through their long and arduous course. Hence the idea 
occurred to two pious founders almost simultaneously, to 
Walter de Merton, at Oxford, in 1270, and to Hugh de 
Balsham, Bishop of Ely, at Cambridge, in 1284, to found 
a House for the reception of students. This was the 
origin of the Collegiate system and explains why the 
Masters of the Colleges are still called Heads of Houses. 
A forewarning of the attitude which the Colleges were 
destined afterwards to take up towards the University 
was given at the foundation of New College at Oxford and 
King's College at Cambridge, the one connected closely 
with Winchester, the other made up entirely of scholars 
from Eton. As for the latter, in addition to the various 
privileges granted, with the sanction of Parliament to it, 
the King obtained bulls from the Pope exempting the 
College and its members from the power and jurisdiction 
of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of Ely, and 
the Chancellor of the University ; and on the 31st of 
January, 1448-9, the University by an instrument under 
its Common Seal, granted that the College, its Provost, 
Fellows and Scholars, should be exempt from the power, 
dominion and jurisdiction of the Chancellor, Vice- 
Chancellor, Proctors, and Ministers of the University. 1 

Men even when making a new departure like to found 
themselves on what is old, so it was natural that these 
pious founders should look round them for a model. 
What could serve their purpose so well as the monasteries, 
many of which had been conspicuous as homes of learning ? 

1 Mullinger, Vol. I., p. 309. 



8 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

The Colleges were not monasteries, they might even be 
anti-monastic in their intentions, but they were fashioned 
on monastic lines. The College buildings bear witness to 
this fact with their enclosed quadrangles, their chambers, 
their halls for common meals, and chapels for common 
worship. These same buildings are a difficulty in the 
way of the innovator when he wants to adapt them to 
modern requirements, and provide baths for the under- 
graduates and houses for the married members of the staff. 

As for the inmates of the Colleges they dedicated 
themselves to learning as the monks dedicated them- 
selves to religion. A College was made up of a 
Master, Fellows, and Scholars, who were accordingly said 
to be " on the foundation." The Scholars were made 
members of the foundation by a solemn ceremony, but 
they were excluded from the administration of the College 
property and business, and from the elections. They were 
the novices in the monastery of learning. The Fellows 
were first known in common with the Scholars as 
Scholares, because both were learners. At Christ Church 
they were called Studentes, and the terms Junior Student 
for Scholar and Senior Student for Fellow survive there 
till this day, but generally they were called Socii, members 
of the societas and sharers in its endowments. They 
were commonly ordered to be chosen from the founder's 
own kin or relatives, from certain schools or from certain 
counties or other definite areas, and the same restrictions 
were made in the case of the Scholars. The Fellows 
correspond to the monks — to the brethren in orders and 
the lay brethren. Over all was a Head, called variously 
Master, Warden, Provost, Rector, President or Principal. 
He may be likened to the Abbot. The Colleges soon began 
to teach, but they confined themselves in the first instance 
to exercises and discussions preparatory to those in the 
public schools, and their Praelectors or Lecturers dis- 
coursed to the University students generally, and not 
merely to the members of their own College. 

Every College had its Statutes or rules. The objects 
of the Statutes were the maintenance of the Society 
under a regular government and with a regular rule of 
life and study. Each Scholar was placed under a Tutor 
who had to answer for his fines and expenses. The Tutor 



INTRODUCTORY. 

as teacher is a later growth and explains the double use 
of the word, both as guardian and instructor. The 
Fellows took an oath of unqualified obedience to the 
Statutes, and in some cases an oath never to suffer any 
alteration in them. 

As for the rule of study this was the old Uni- 
versity course which has already been explained. The 
Fellow was generally required by the Statutes, after 
completing the Arts Course, to proceed in one of the 
Faculties, that of Theology in the majority of instances, 
while some would take up Law, and fewer still Medicine. 
The business of the Fellows was to study not to teach. 
After they had completed their education they took bene- 
fices, or practised Law or Medicine, and thus the ranks of 
the learned professions were filled. 

The rule of life was simple. It included common 
meals, during which the Bible was read by the Bible 
Clerks, and silence kept, the use of the Latin tongue, 
uniformity in dress, strict obedience to the Head and 
College officers, terminal scrutinies for the purpose of 
inquiring into the life, morals, and progress in studies 
of all the members of the College, and a system of sur- 
veillance to be exercised by the Senior Fellows over the 
Junior. Regular attendance at the services of the Church 
was required of all, as was residence. A non-resident 
Fellow in those days was a contradiction in terms. 
Poverty was much insisted on as a qualification for a 
Fellowship. Hence the rule that no Fellow should 
possess more than a certain amount of property. Celibacy 
was an express obligation, and where Fellows had to be 
in Holy Orders it followed of necessity. The Heads were 
generally required to be in Priests' orders, and the great 
majority of the Fellows were required to take Priests' 
orders within a certain period after their election. Thus 
the three monastic obligations of poverty, chastity, and 
obedience were all well looked after. Every College had 
a Visitor whose functions were twofold: (1) to hear 
appeals and interpret the Statutes ; and (2) to visit at 
certain intervals, either in person or by commission, for 
the purposes of inspection and, if need be, of reformation. 

The College system once started speedily grew in 
riches and importance. New Colleges were constantly 



10 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

being founded and received endowments from their 
founders, from benefactors, and from the Royal Bounty. 
The University has never been successful in stirring men's 
charity and it remains poor to this day amid the ever- 
increasing resources of the Colleges, and where the wealth 
is, there will the influence be also. " The instruction 
passed into the hands of the Colleges, partly, perhaps, 
in consequence of the decline of the Scholastic Philosophy, 
which formed the staple of the old Academical system, 
and the rise of the Classical studies which the Colleges 
took up. Ultimately no one was allowed to be a 
member of the University without being a member of 
a College." l 

This process of the University decreasing and the 
Colleges increasing was helped on by the course of events. 
It fell to the lot of Elizabeth after the Reformation, to 
settle the form of the State-Church and its relations with 
the State. In this settlement two such bodies as the 
Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, so strong, so rich, 
and so intimately connected with the Church, could not 
be left out of account. 

The first paragraph of this chapter refers to an Act 
of Parliament of the thirteenth year of Queen Elizabeth, 
confirming all the rights and privileges of the University 
of Cambridge. But there is another side to this picture 
of royal graciousness. The Puritans at this time were 
strong and active at Cambridge. At first they confined 
their opposition to " wearing the cap and surplice, and 
such like apparel, and the posture in receiving the sacra- 
ment," but afterwards they went much further. Their 
leader was Thomas Cartwright, a Fellow of Trinity College 
and Lady Margaret Reader in Divinity. He openly 
attacked the Church of England form of government as 
unscriptural, and taught that " archbishops, deans, arch- 
deacons, etc., were offices and names of impiety." Such 
conduct was not to be tolerated and the Church of 
England party in the University at once took proceedings 
against him. It was pending these proceedings that 
Whitgift, Master of Trinity College, informed Sir William 
Cecil, Chancellor of the University, that it was in his 

i Goldwin Smith, Reorganisation of the University of Oxford, p. 6. 



INTRODUCTOKY. 11 

opinion necessary that the Statutes of the University 
should be reviewed and amended. Sir William Cecil 
approved of the suggestion, and referred the consideration 
of the business to Whitgift and the other Masters of 
Colleges, who prepared the draft of the new Code. This 
was submitted to the Chancellor who, after consulting- 
Archbishop Parker thereon, approved of the same, and 
it received the Royal Assent on September 25, 1570. 

Queen Elizabeth and her advisers had come to the 
conclusion that the University as a single and unified 
body was more dangerous than the several Colleges in 
their individual capacity were likely to be. They there- 
fore decided to favour the component parts at the expense 
of the corporate whole. Elizabeth's second Code effected 
what was practically a revolution. How this was brought 
about deserves to be carefully studied. " The University, 
in its earlier stages, was regulated, as to its internal 
administration, by Statutes or Ordinances framed and 
passed by its own legislative Senate" 1 ; but by the 
Elizabethan Statutes " the Heads of Houses were con- 
stituted a distinct and separate estate in the government 
of the University. In the election of the Vice-Chancellor, 
the ordinary Lecturers, the Bedels, and inferior officers, 
they were empowered to nominate two persons, one of 
whom was necessarily chosen by the united Houses of 
Regents and Non-Regents on the following day ; a most 
important privilege, which they further amplified by 
interpretation. For the office of Vice-Chancellor two 
Heads of Houses were always nominated, so that the 
office still goes in rotation to the Masters of the Colleges. 
They were united with the Doctors and Scrutators in 
choosing the Caput Senatus. The Chancellor could not 
expel a student or Scholar, nor imprison a Doctor or 
Head of a House without the concurrence of a majority 
of their number ; they were the councillors and assessors 
of the Chancellor in matters affecting the conduct and 
discipline of the scholars ; they fixed the times and the 
subjects of the ordinary and other lectures ; they were 
discharged from the performance of all exercises in the 
public schools and elsewhere ; and an absolute veto was 

1 Royal Commission (Cambridge) Report, 1852, p. 2. 



12 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 

given to them in their own Colleges, in all elections of 
Fellows, Scholars, officers and servants, and in the grant- 
ing of leases and all public acts whatsoever. Finally they 
were made the authorised interpreters of whatever was 
doubtful or ambiguous in the new Code. 

"The Caput Senatus, composed of the Chancellor, a 
Doctor of each of the three faculties, a Non-Regent and a 
Regent Master of Arts, was appointed at the beginning of 
the academical year. To each of these sextumviri was 
given an absolute veto, and no Grace, whether for Degrees 
or for any object whatever could be submitted to the 
Houses of Regents and Non-Regents which had not 
received the previous sanction of every member of the 
Caput. 

" The extraordinary powers conferred upon this body 
by their continuance during an entire year, and the exclu- 
sion of the great body of the Senate from all share in its 
nomination, were innovations upon the ancient constitu- 
tion of the University of the most important and funda- 
mental character. By the Statutes which were previously 
in force, some at least of the members of the Caput were 
generally appointed for one Congregation only ; and 
whatever were the powers which they possessed in one 
Congregation, they could not permanently retard or 
embarrass the legislative or administrative proceedings 
of the University. The ancient powers of the Proctors, 
whether in the Congregation or elsewhere, were either 
entirely abrogated or greatly circumscribed ; they were 
formerly elected openly by the Regents, but were now 
nominated according to a cycle of Colleges, and merely 
submitted to the Regents for their approbation. What- 
ever authority was given to them, by the ancient statutes, 
of regulating the times and subjects of the public read- 
ings and disputations, of imprisoning scholars, of sus- 
pending gremials from their votes in the Congregations 
or from Degrees taken or to betaken, and even in extreme 
cases of acting in defiance of the Chancellor himself, were 
now either abrogated or transferred to the Chancellor 
and his assessors. The custody of the public and of the 
private chests, and the administration of the finances of 
the University, were given to the Chancellor and the 
proper custodies; they no longer continued to be the chief 



INTRODUCTORY. 13 

administrative officers of the University as the organs 
of the House of Regents, but were made, in all their 
functions, that of creation excepted, subordinate to the 
authority of the Chancellor. They were still required to 
regulate the disputations of the Masters of Arts, and to 
control the public exercises in all the Schools (those 
of Theology excepted) ; while the power of inflicting 
punishments and imposing fines was given to the Chan- 
cellor. . . 

" The University continued to retain the power of 
making new statutes ' for the increase of learning, and 
the preservation of discipline and good conduct amongst 
scholars,' provided they neither detracted from, nor inter- 
fered with, the Royal Statutes ; all other statutes and 
customs which were contrary to them were declared to 
be abrogated and rescinded." ' 

A similar policy was pursued by Elizabeth at Oxford. 
Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, who was Chancellor of 
the University from 1565 to 1588, carried through the 
necessary changes in the Statutes. Under James the 
First both the Universities were more effectively closed 
against all who were not members of the Church of 
England, as that monarch sent letters which enjoined 
subscription to the three articles of the Thirty-sixth 
Canon upon admission to Degrees, which had not 
previously been required. It was Laud who, in the 
reign of Charles I., by his Code, known as the Laudian 
or Caroline Statutes (which were practically a confirma- 
tion of those of Elizabeth), put the final impress of 
character on Oxford. He attempted the visitation of 
Cambridge, but the Puritans rose in arms against him 
and he was compelled to retire. At Oxford he worked 
his will to the full. Professor Goldwin Smith thus 
describes what happened. 2 

" The constitution of the University was subverted 
in three ways. (1) Laud, confirming an arrangement 
made under Leicester, took away the initiative in 
legislation from the Convocation and vested in the 
Board of Heads of Houses (entitled the Hebdomadal 

1 Peacock, Observations on the Statutes, pp. 45-51. (Quoted in Cooper, 
Annals, Vol. II., pp. 258-261.) 

2 Reorganisation, p. 7. 



14 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Board), men elected by close Colleges, themselves with- 
out educational duties, and by their social position 
estranged from such educational activity as there might 
be in the place. (2) The Vice-Chancellorship, which, 
the Chancellor being now a non-resident grandee, was 
really the chief office of the University, was made 
rotatory among the Heads of Houses, and the University 
was thus deprived of the power of electing its own head. 
(3) Through the system of dispensations and the dis- 
regard of the College Statutes respecting residence, 
Convocation became to a much greater extent non- 
resident, while the facilities of communication and 
locomotion having increased, non-resident members 
began to come up more frequently to vote; and thus 
the University fell under the control of a non-resident 
and non-academical body, mainly clerical, and using its 
power for the objects of the political and ecclesiastical 
party to which the clergy belonged. Railroads have 
greatly intensified the last-mentioned evil. 

"The constitutions of the separate Colleges also tacitly 
underwent a momentous change. The Head was origin- 
ally a celibate, living with the Fellows. In the case 
of the Colleges founded before the Reformation it 
was not necessary to bind him expressly to celibacy, 
because he was always a priest, and a priest could not 
be married ; in the Colleges founded after the Reformation 
he was expressly bound. The Heads, however, of the 
earlier Colleges took advantage of the legal flaw, those 
of the later got the restriction repealed ; the original 
lodgings in the tower were exchanged for a separate and 
domestic house, and thus the Head of each College 
became socially severed from his Fellows, and the whole 
order from the University at large, almost absolute power 
over which it at the same time acquired. 

" The result of these untoward accidents, combined 
with the general deadness of public duty during the 
greater part of the last century, was not only torpor 
but corruption within the University itself, and fatal 
estrangement from the nation. The effect upon the 
character of our governing class, bred up here in ignor- 
ance and Jacobitism, was calamitous at the time, and 
has not yet been effaced." 



INTRODUCTORY. 15 

The same writer could accordingly describe Oxford 
in his historical statement to the Commissioners of 1850 
in these terms : — 

" The Colleges have now become the University, and 
have absorbed all the functions of that institution, 
both educational and literary. Its Students must all 
be members of one of these Societies. Their Heads 
furnish its Vice-Chancellors, and form its Board of 
Executive Governors ; their Fellows are its Teachers, its 
Examiners, its Proctors, its learned men, and its ordinary 
Legislature. The only elements of the University external 
to the Colleges are the staff of Professors and the five 
surviving Halls. . . 

"The function of teaching has been super-added to the 
statutable duties of a Tutor; and Tutorships, limited in 
number, have been established in all the Colleges. The 
Tutors are nominated solely by the Head, and are almost 
invariably chosen from the number of the Fellows. 

"The rule of study imposed by the Statutes, as regards 
the Graduate Fellows, has, with the change of the Uni- 
versity system, become wholly obsolete. 

"The rule of life, as regards the Graduate Fellows, has 
also ceased to be observed. Its only remnant consists in 
the use, which is no longer obligatory, of a common Hall, 
and the retention of a few old customs. 

"Residence in the case of actual Fellows not holding 
College offices, is in all cases entirely dispensed with. . . 
All the statutable duties of a Fellowship having thus 
become obsolete, the Fellowships are sinecures, with the 
exception perhaps of those which are held by Tutors, and 
which may be considered as forming part of their other- 
wise inadequate stipend. A certain number may be 
likewise regarded as forming prizes for academical merit 
bestowed by examination. . . 

"The Visitors continue to receive appeals which they try 
privately. They have long ceased to visit their Colleges, 
or to interfere spontaneously for the enforcement of 
Statutes, the correction of abuses or any other purpose. 

" The oaths to observe the Statutes are sworn as 
before." ' 

Professor Goldwin Smith elsewhere explains that the 

1 Statement, pp. 6-8. 



16 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

University as the Federal bond of the Colleges retained 
the holding of the examinations, the granting of degrees, 
and the exercise of discipline outside the College precincts. 

If any further proof were needed of the low estate to 
which the Universities had sunk it might be found in the 
fact that New College at Oxford and King's College at 
Cambridge had demanded and obtained degrees for their 
undergraduate members without any University exami- 
nation. 

The Elizabethan Codes maintained their existence 
from 1570 till they were swept away by the Acts of 1854 
and 1856 — a period not far short of 300 years. They were 
consequently still the nominal law of the Universities in 
the year 1800, but time had made them obsolete in many 
respects and impossible of fulfilment. 

Oxford and Cambridge have undergone great vicissi- 
tudes of fortune, as they have been affected by pestilence, 
civil war, and revolution either in Church or State. The 
number of their students in pre-Reformation times has 
no doubt been greatly exaggerated, but it must have been 
very large in proportion to the population. The Reforma- 
tion was a temporary disaster. The dissolution of the 
monasteries and the suppression of the religious orders 
caused a complete cessation of the flow of monks and 
friars. As the University of Oxford put it, addressing 
Sir Thomas More, " Abbots are ordering their monks 
home, nobles taking away their sons, and priests their 
nephews and kinsmen. The number of scholars is 
decreasing, our halls are going to decay, and all liberal 
studies waxing cold. The Fellows of Colleges are almost 
the only residents left." 1 But as the clergy went out, the 
laity gradually came in, and " in the first quarter of the 
seventeenth century both Universities were as large as 
they were destined to be for over two hundred years, until 
1850, in fact." 2 The Restoration brought peace, but it can 
hardly be said to have brought prosperity. A period of 
lethargy set in during which Oxford fell to almost in- 
credible depths. The old examination system had become 
obsolete, and nothing had been put in its place. A Conti- 
nental observer, Wendeborn, who travelled through 

1 Wood, quoted by Mark Pattison, Suggestions, p. 130. 
2 Venn, Matriculations, p. 3. 



INTRODUCTORY. 17 

England before 1788, gives an amusing account of what 
he saw. The Presiding Examiner, the Respondent, or 
candidate for a Degree, and the three Opponents came 
into the Schools and amid profound silence passed the 
statutory time in the study of a novel or other enter- 
taining work. 1 Oxford in fact gave its Degrees without 
any examination to all who had paid their fees and kept 
the required number of terms. Cambridge was saved 
from falling quite so low by the influence of Sir Isaac 
Newton and his successors. It required a certain amount 
of mathematics before granting a Degree. 

In 1800 there was at Cambridge the same number 
of Colleges, 17, as there is now, the youngest of them, 
Downing, having been incorporated into the University 
on September 22nd of the same year. The list of Colleges 
in order of foundation is St. Peter's or Peterhouse (a.d. 
1284), Clare (1326), Pembroke (1347), Gonville and Caius 
(1348), Trinity Hall (1350), Corpus (1352), King's (1441), 
Queens' (1448), St. Catharine's (1473), Jesus (1496), Christ's 
(1505), St. John's (1511), Magdalene (1519), Trinity (1546). 
These 14 may be accounted pre-Reformation Colleges. 
The remaining are Emmanuel (1584), Sidney Sussex (1596), 
and Downing (1800). There was but one examination for 
a Degree, the Mathematical Tripos, the first list of which 
is for the year 1747-8. Classics had been encouraged by 
the institution of the Chancellor's Medals, first given by 
the Duke of Newcastle in 1751. Until 1871 inclusive, 
candidates for these medals were required to have passed 
the Mathematical Tripos and to have gained a place 
among the Senior Optimes at least. There were also 
in 1800 twenty-one Professors — three of Divinity, the four 
Regius Professors of Civil Law, Physic, Hebrew and 
Greek, two of Mathematics, two of Astronomy, two of 
Arabic, four of the Natural Sciences, Chemistry, Anatomy, 
Botany and Geology, and also the Professors of Moral 
Philosophy, Music, Modern History and the Laws of 
England. 

At Oxford in 1800 there were 20 Colleges— Merton 
(founded a.d. 1270), University (1280), Exeter (1314), Oriel 
(1326), Balliol (1340), Queen's (1340), New (1386), Lincoln 

1 Quoted in Hamilton, Discussions, p. 759 (note). 



18 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

(1417), All Souls (1438), Magdalen (1457), Brasenose (1509), 
Corpus Christi (1516), Christ Church (1525). These may 
be counted as the pre - Reformation Colleges. There 
followed Trinity (1555), St. John's (1555), Jesus (1571), 
Wadham (1612), Pembroke (1624), Worcester (1714), and 
Hertford (1740). The last - mentioned College subse- 
quently became extinct, but by an Act of Parliament 
passed in the year 1874 Magdalen Hall was re-endowed 
under this name as a close Church of England founda- 
tion. Keble College, another close Church of England 
foundation, was admitted into the University in 1871. 
It enjoys all the privileges of a College except as regards 
the status of its Head, who is not eligible for the office 
of Vice-Chancellor. It is also the only College at Oxford 
which has no Fellows, while All Souls has Fellows but 
no undergraduates. 

The Professoriate has had much the same history at 
Oxford as at Cambridge. There also the Lady Margaret 
founded the first Professorship, that of Divinity, in 1496. 
Henry VIII. followed in 1535 with five Regius Professor- 
ships as at the sister University. Besides the above there 
were in 1800 thirteen other Professorships, one Praelec- 
torship, and one Readership, the subjects being Astronomy 
(2), Moral Philosophy, History (2), Music, Arabic (2), Poetry, 
Botany, Anglo-Saxon, Law, Medicine, Natural Philosophy 
and Anatomy. Instruction was thus provided as pleased 
benevolent founders, and not as the University discovered 
its own needs. 



CHAPTER II. 

THE BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 

Cardinal Newman in the Discourse introductory to 
his hook entitled "The Idea of a University" 1 has the 
following passage: — "About fifty years since, the English 
University of which I was so long a member, after a 
century of inactivity, at length was roused, at a time 
when (as I may say) it was giving no education at all to 
the youth committed to its keeping, to a sense of the 
responsibilities which its profession and its station 
involved. . . The course of beneficial change made 
progress, and what was at the first but the result of 
individual energy and an act of the academical corpor- 
ation, gradually became popular, and was taken up and 
carried out by the separate collegiate bodies of which 
the University is composed. This was the first stage of 
the controversy. Years passed away, and then political 
adversaries arose against it, and the system of education 
which it had established was a second time assailed. . . 
In the former of these two controversies the charge 
brought against its studies was their remoteness from 
the occupations and duties of life, to which they are the 
formal introduction, or, in other words, their inutility ; 
in the latter, it was their connexion with a particular 
form of belief, or, in other words, their religious exclu- 
siveness.'''' 

The writer recurs to the subject in the seventh 
Discourse of the same book — that on Knowledge and Pro- 
fessional Skill. " This question (the respective merits of 
a ' liberal ' and a ' useful ' education) formed one main 
subject of the controversy, to which I referred in the 

1 This book consists of a series of nine lectures addressed to the 
Catholics of Dublin. It was first published in 1852 under the title of 
"The Scope and Nature of University Education" and was republished 
later on under the altered title. 



20 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Introduction to the present Discourses, as having been 
sustained in the first decade of this century by a 
celebrated Northern Review on the one hand, and 
defenders of the University of Oxford on the other. 
Hardly had the authorities of that ancient seat of 
learning, waking from their long neglect, set on foot 
a plan for the education of the youth committed to 
them, than the representatives of science and literature 
in the city which has sometimes been called the Northern 
Athens, remonstrated, with their gravest arguments and 
their most brilliant satire, against the direction and 
shape which the reform was taking. . . It was not 
to be expected that they would be allowed to walk at 
leisure over the field of controversy which they had 
selected. Accordingly they were encountered in behalf 
of the University by two men of great name and influ- 
ence in their day ; . . and the defence thus provided 
for the Oxford studies has kept its ground to this day. 
. . . These defenders, I have said, were two, of whom 
the more distinguished was the late Dr. Copleston, then 
a Fellow of his College (Oriel), successively its Provost, 
and Protestant Bishop of Llandaff. . . His peculiar 
vigour and keenness of mind enabled him, when a young 
man, single-handed with easy gallantry, to encounter 
and overthrow the charge of three giants of the North 
combined against him. I believe I am right in saying 
that, in the progress of the controversy, the most 
scientific, the most critical, and the most witty, of that 
literary company, all of them now, as he himself, removed 
from this visible scene, Professor Playfair, Lord Jeffrey, 
and the Rev. Sydney Smith, threw together their several 
efforts into one article of their Review, in order to crush 
and pound to dust the audacious controvertist who had 
come out against them in defence of his own Institu- 
tions." 

These sentences from Newman may serve as a 
starting - point for this history. It was in 1800 that 
Oxford, " waking from its long neglect," passed its new 
Statute instituting examinations for a Degree. Cam- 
bridge had long anticipated it by establishing the 
Mathematical Tripos in 1747-8 though it delayed the 
Classical Tripos till 1824. The "hardly" of Cardinal 



BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 21 

Newman covers a period of ten years. 1 Copleston pub- 
lished in 1810 his Reply to the " Calumnies of the Edin- 
burgh Revietv against Oxford," in which he complains 
of " covert insinuation, and open railing, sarcastic sneers 
and allusions " and then of " bold accusations against 
the English Universities and especially against Oxford " 
(p. 10). Let us deal with each of these charges in turn. 

An example of the first may be found in some extracts 
from Don Manuel Espriella's "Letters from England." 2 
Espriella was an imaginary Spaniard who was supposed 
to have come to England in 1802. 

" In another part of the book, while on a visit to 
Cambridge he (Espriella) makes some observations, from 
which we may gather his opinion of both Universities. 
I inquired of one whom I met what were the real 
advantages of these institutions to the country at large, 
and to the individuals who study in them. ' They are 
of this service,' he replied, 'to the country at large, 
that they are the great schools by which established 
opinions are inculcated and perpetuated. I do not know 
that men gain much here, yet it is a regular and essential 
part of our education ; and they who have not gone 
through it always feel that their education has been 
defective. A knowledge of the world, that is to say, of 
our world, and of the men in it is gained here ; and 
that knowledge remains when Greek and Geometry are 
forgotten.' I asked him which was the best of the two 
Universities ; he answered that Cambridge was as much 
superior to Oxford, as Oxford was to Salamanca. I could 
not forbear smiling at his scale of depreciation ; he per- 
ceived it, and begged my pardon, saying, that he as 
little intended to undervalue the establishments of my 
country, as to overrate the one of which he was himself 
a member. ' We are bad enough,' said he, ' Heaven 
knows ; but not so bad as Oxford. They are now at- 
tempting to imitate us in some of those points wherein 



1 " The first Statute for the awarding of Honours by Public Exami- 
nation was passed in 1800. In 1807, this Statute was abrogated on the 
ground that it needed improvement in several points." Oxford Reform and 
Oxford Professors, by H. H. Vaughan, p. 6. It may be this second 
Statute which Newman had in his mind. 

2 Edinburgh Review, Vol. XL, pp. 378-379. Jan. 1808. 



22 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

the advantage on our part is too notorious to be disputed. 
The effect may be seen in another generation — meantime, 
the imitation is a confession of inferiority.' " 

The Reviewer continues : — 

" To the question whether we might regard the 
Universities as the seats of learning and the Muses, we 
have the following particularly smart answer : ' As for 
the Muses, Sir, you have traversed the banks of the Cam, 
and must know whether you have seen any nine ladies 
who may answer their description. We do certainly 
produce verses, both Greek and Latin, which are worthy 
of gold medals, and English ones also, after the newest 
and most approved receipt for verse-making. Of learning, 
such as is required for the purposes of tuition, there is 
much ; beyond it, except in Mathematics, none. In this 
we only share the common degeneracy. The Moham- 
medans believe that when Gog and Magog are to come, 
the race of men will have dwindled to such littleness, 
that a shoe of one of the present generation will serve 
them for a house. If this prophecy be typical of the 
intellectual diminution of the species, Gog and Magog 
may soon be expected in the neighbourhood of their own 
hills.' l 

" ' The truth is, Sir,' he continued, ' that the institu- 
tions of men grow old like men themselves, and, like 
women, are always the last to perceive their own decay. 
When Universities were the only schools of learning, they 
were of great and important utility ; as soon as there 
were others, they ceased to be the best, because their 
forms were prescribed, and they could adopt no improve- 
ment till long after it was generally acknowledged. 
There are other causes of decline. We educate for only 
one profession ; when colleges were founded, that one was 
the most important ; it is now no longer so ; they who 
are destined for the others find it necessary to study 
elsewhere, and it begins to be perceived that this is not 
a necessary stage upon the road. This might be remedied. 
We have professors of everything, who hold their situa- 
tions and do nothing. In Edinburgh, the income of the 
professor depends upon his exertions ; and, in conse- 

1 The Gogmagog Hills are just outside Cambridge to the S.E. 



BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 23 

quence, the reputation of that University is so high that 
Englishmen think it necessary to finish their education 
by passing a year there. They learn shallow metaphysics 
there, and come back worse than they went, inasmuch 
as it is better to be empty than flatulent.' " 

To turn to the next count in Copleston's indictment 
— the first of the " bold accusations " appears to occur in 
a review of La Place's " Traite de Mecanique Celeste." 
The writer says : — - 

" In the list of the mathematicians and philosophers, 
to whom physical astronomy, for the last sixty or seventy 
years has been indebted for its improvements, hardly a 
name from Great Britain falls to be mentioned. What is 
the reason of this '? " His answer to his own question is 
as follows : — 2 

" We believe that it is chiefly in the public institu- 
tions of England that we are to seek for the causes of the 
deficiency here referred to, and particularly in the two 
great centres from which knowledge is supposed to 
radiate over all the rest of the island. In one of these, 
where the dictates of Aristotle are still listened to as 
infallible decrees, and where the infancy of science is 
mistaken for its maturity, the mathematical sciences 
have never flourished ; and the scholar has no means of 
advancing beyond the mere elements of geometry." 

The Reviewer, having thus demolished Oxford in a 
single sentence, next turns his attention to Cambridge 
and criticises it at greater length. He admits that "in 
the other seminary, the dominion of prejudice is not 
equally strong ; . . mathematical learning is there 
the great object of study, but still we must object to the 
method in which this object is pursued. . . The 
pupil must study, not to learn the spirit of geometry, 
or to acquire the 8wa/uus eupt]TiKrj by which the theorems 
were discovered, but to know them as a child knows his 
chatechism, by heart, so as to answer readily to certain 
interrogations." 3 

1 Edinburgh Review, Vol. XI., p. 279. 2 p. 283. 

3 Sir William Hamilton (Discussions, p. 320) maintains that this 
article, written by Playfair, was the means of forcing on Cambridge the 
knowledge of the Continental analysis. According to Hamilton, Cambridge 
then went to the other extreme and became conspicuous for the undue 
predominance of algebraic mathematics. 



24 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

The Edinburgh Review, which dealt so scornfully 
with Oxford mathematics, did not even spare its classics. 
In an article on the Clarendon Press edition of Strabo 1 
the Reviewer thus opens the attack : — 

" Nothing in Europe is at all comparable, in point 
of extent and magnificence, to the endowment of the 
University of Oxford, — or to the veneration which is 
there paid to the Greek and Latin languages." He 
admits that it is " not without reason, that this learned 
University makes the study of the Greek and Latin 
languages, especially of the former, its first object in the 
education of those committed to its care." He admires 
" the spacious and comfortable abodes, and ample revenues 
provided for the instructors, which exempt them from 
all worldly cares, but those of learning and teaching." 
The Clarendon Press at Oxford, too, being richly endowed, 
always " raises the highest expectations in the mind of 
every scholar," but somehow " the constant renovation of 
hope has hitherto been followed by as constant a succes- 
sion of disappointments." The edition of Apollonius 
Rhodius was an " unhappy attempt " ; the " single and 
minute, but very successful instance of Aristotle's Poetics 
was produced by an auxiliary volunteer." " Of the Homer, 
the editors appear to be at least half a century behind the 
rest of the world in critical knowledge." The edition of 
Strabo is then reviewed in detail and with great severity. 

The third article which raised the ire of Oxford was 
a review 2 of Edgeworth's Essays on Professional Educa- 
tion. The writer while denying that Mr. Edge worth is 
" either very new, very profound, or very right in his 
opinions," yet returns him " thanks for the courage with 
which he has combated the excessive abuse of classical 
learning in England," and quotes with approval a passage 
beginning thus:— "The principal defect in the present 
system of our great schools is, that they devote too large 
a portion of time to Latin and Greek. It is true, that the 
attainment of classical literature is highly desirable ; 
but it should not, or rather it need not, be the exclusive 
object of boys during eight or nine years." 

Mr. Edgeworth having attacked classics in the public 
schools, the Reviewer on his part extends the assault to 

1 Vol. XIV., p. 429. 2 Vol. XV., pp. 40-53. 



BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 25 

the Universities themselves. " A young Englishman," 
he says, " goes to school at six or seven years old, and he 
remains in a course of education till twenty-three or 
twenty-four years of age. In all that time, his sole and 
exclusive occupation is learning Latin and Greek 1 ; he has 
scarcely a notion that there is any other kind of ex. 
cellence ; and the great system of facts with which he is 
most perfectly acquainted, are the intrigues of the Heathen 
Gods; with whom Pan slept? with whom Jupiter? — 
whom Apollo ravished? These facts the English youth 
get by heart the moment they quit the nursery ; and are 
most sedulously and industriously instructed in them till 
the best and most active part of life is passed away." 
And again 2 : " All the solid and masculine parts of (a young 
man's) understanding are left wholly without cultiva- 
tion ; he hates the pain of thinking, and suspects every 
man whose boldness and originality call upon him to 
defend his opinions and prove his assertions, and worst 
of all a genuine Oxford tutor would shudder to hear his 
young men disputing upon moral and political truth, 
forming and pulling down theories, and indulging in all 
the boldness of youthful discussion. He would augur 
nothing from it, but impiety to God, and treason to 
kings." 3 As a practical suggestion the Reviewer recom- 
mends Political Economy. " When an University has 
been doing useless things for a long time, it appears at 
first degrading to them to be useful. A set of lectures 
upon political economy would be discouraged at Oxford, 
probably despised, probably not permitted ; . . but 
what ought the term University to mean, but a place 
where every science is taught which is liberal and is useful 
to mankind? Nothing will so much tend to bring 
classical literature within proper bounds, as a steady and 
invariable appeal to utility in our appreciation of all 
human knowledge." 4 

It was not to be supposed that Oxford would allow 
accusations and assertions such as these to go un- 
noticed, and in 1810 Copleston published his pamphlet 

1 He adds in a footnote: — "Unless he goes to the University of 
Cambridge, and then classics occupy him entirely about ten years ; and 
divide him with mathematics for four or five more." 

2 p. 49. 8 p. 50. 4 p. 51. 



26 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

"A Reply to the calumnies of the Edinburgh Review 
against Oxford containing an account of studies pursued 
in that University." After a general introduction he 
deals in his first chapter with the charge from the 
article on La Place ; in the second chapter, with the 
review of Strabo ; in the third, with the review of Edge- 
worth ; in the fourth he explains the course of studies 
pursued at Oxford ; while in the fifth and concluding 
chapter he discourses on plans of education in general 
and particularly of English education. The final pages 
of Copleston's pamphlet betray his sense that all was 
not well at Oxford in spite of his valiant defence. He 
writes : " There are some points in the constitution of 
this place . . . which ought to be known and well- 
considered before any comparison is made between what 
we are, and what we ought to be. The University of 
Oxford is not a national foundation. It is a congeries of 
foundations, originating some in royal munificence, but 
more in private piety and bounty. They are moulded 
indeed into one corporation ; but each one of our twenty 
Colleges is a corporation by itself, and has its own 
peculiar Statutes, not only regulating its internal 
affairs, but confining its benefits by a great variety of 
limitations ; . . now it is certain that each of these 
constitutions cannot be the best." 1 As for reform, he 
pleads the sacredness of private property and the 
sanctity of wills, and specifically rejects the proposal of 
Mr. Cockburn, late Christian Advocate at Cambridge, to 
limit the duration of all Fellowships to ten or twelve years. 
The reply of the Edinburgh Review to Copleston, of 
which Cardinal Newman gives so lively an account, is to 
be found in Vol. XVI., pp. 158-187. It goes over the whole 
ground again and concludes with this challenge, which it 
is safe to say, was never replied to ; the facts would have 
been too damning. " For his University lectures, if 
(the author of the pamphlet) really wishes to be honest, 
let him give to the public, 1st, a list of lecturers who 
receive salaries and do nothing for them ; 2nd, a list 
of lecturers who do read; 3rdly, the average number of 
their pupils for three years past ; 4thly, the number of 

l p. 133. 



BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 27 

lectures read in the year; 5thly, the whole number 
of undergraduates and bachelors in the University." 

Copleston published in the same year, 1810, "A 
Second Reply to the Edinburgh, Review, by the Author of 
a Reply to the Calumnies of that Review against Oxford," 
and in 1811 a " Third Reply," but this last was drawn 
by a remark in a review of Woodhouse's Trigonometry 1 
and deals with quite a minor point. The trio of Edin- 
burgh Reviewers contented themselves with their one 
combined article, and thus the wordy warfare finally 
flickered out. 

Mr. T. E. Kebbel in his life of Copleston in the 
Dictionary of National Biography 2 agrees with Newman 
as to the issue of the contest. He says : " The Edinburgh 
Review soon afterwards published an attack on the 
Oxford system of education, to which Copleston at once 
replied and completely demolished his antagonist, whom 
he convicted not only of stark ignorance of what he had 
undertaken to condemn, but of much bad Latin besides." 
This is surely an inadequate account of the matter. It 
was more than a question of bad Latin or bad Greek 
either. Of the two words of Greek quoted above one is 
wrong, and Copleston triumphantly fastens on the long e 
which ought to be short, though he does not notice the 
queer spelling " chatechism " which comes immediately 
after it and is an equally worthy object of attack. As for 
the bad Latin there was some on both sides, and the best 
that Copleston could say for the Oxford Latinity was 
that it was no worse than the average modern commodity. 
With regard to the conviction of stark ignorance, the sen- 
tence which gave most offence was that in which Oxford 
was described as a place " where the dictates of Aristotle 
are still listened to as infallible decrees, and where the 
infancy of science is mistaken for its maturity, the 
mathematical sciences have never flourished, and the 
scholar has no means of advancing beyond the mere 
elements of geometry." These charges were not all 
literally true. Copleston had no difficulty in showing that 
the critical faculty at Oxford was occasionally brought to 
bear even on Aristotle, that it had some scientific ideas 

l Edinburgh Review, Vol. XVII., p. 126. 2 Vol. XII., p. 175. 



28 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

that were more than elementary, and that a scholar had 
the means of advancing beyond the mere elements of 
geometry. But because a man overstates his case, is he 
thereby proved to have no case at all '? One of the above 
assertions was literally true. The mathematical sciences 
did not then nourish at Oxford. They do not nourish 
there now. In 1810, Oxford almost wholly neglected 
science, and was far too much in bondage to the authority 
of Aristotle. On this latter point let Sir William 
Hamilton be called as a witness. He writes, " The easier 
parts of Aristotle's system were indeed still retained ; but 
these might, in the circumstances, have been as well 
omitted ; because read as fragments, and by minds 
undisciplined to abstraction, they could neither be under- 
stood themselves, nor stimulate the intellect to understand 
aught else. There was no gradation from the easy to the 
difficult, from the new to the old. Philosophy was taught, 
philosophy was learned more by rote than by reason ; and 
an abrupt intrusion by the tyro thinker into the Ethics 
or Politics of the Stagirite might discourage or disgust 
even a potential Montesquieu. Logic alone was studied 
in a modern summary. But here too the unphilosophical 
character of the Oxford philosophical discipline is 
apparent. That University, having formerly adopted, still 
adheres to the Compendium of Aldrich, not because 
Aldrich was a learned dialectician, but an academical 
dignitary; and the book, not overvalued by its able author, 
after leading and misleading Oxford logicians, during 
former generations, at last affords a more appropriate 
text for their corrections in the present. But should 
Alma Mater thus lag behind her alumni?" 1 He adds in a 
note, " See Mr. Mansel's Notes on the Rudimenta of 
Aldrich. Of these, without disparagement to the Dean, it 
may be said — ' La sauce vaut mieux que le poisson.' " 

Copleston really gave his case away when he affirmed 
that the University was not a national institution. He 
felt that there was nothing in existence at Oxford which 
deserved to be called by that name, and laid the blame on 
the twenty Colleges, some of which he admitted had 
imperfect constitutions. The Edinburgh Reviewers 

i Discussions, p. 809. 



BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 29 

regarded the University as a national institution. They 
criticised it from that point of view, and they found it 
wanting. It undoubtedly was wanting, so that if the 
formal victory is given to Copleston, the real victory must 
be assigned to the critics. The Reviewers made little or 
no suggestion of reform. They attacked things as they 
stood. Their words made but slight impression at the 
time, but they showed that the spirit of criticism was 
alive, and inspired the hope that the effects of it might be 
seen in days to come. 

The reader may get further light by reading the 
following accounts of the Examination system as it 
prevailed at Oxford and Cambridge in these early days. 

The first is by Copleston himself, and is to be found 
in the " Reply to the Calumnies," pp. 138-147, and runs 
thus : 

"According to the last regulations, the University 
honours are obtained in the following manner. 

"As soon as the student enters on his third year, he is 
subject to a public examination, which admits him, not 
to the Degree of Bachelor of Arts, but to that inter- 
mediate step, which still retains its old title of SopJiista 
General is. The old exercise was a logical disputation in 
the public Schools on three philosophical questions, which 
had long dwindled into an insignificant form, before the 
present exercise was substituted in its room. At this 
previous examination he is expected to construe accur- 
ately some one Greek and one Latin book at least ; the 
most difficult works are not required or encouraged, as 
there is no competition between the candidates, and an 
accurate grammatical acquaintance with the structure of 
the two languages is the point chiefly inquired into. 
Xenophon, Homer, Herodotus, Sophocles, Euripides and 
Demosthenes among the Greeks, and Virgil, Horace, 
Sallust, Livy and Cicero among the Latins, are the most 
usual books. Besides this, he is examined in some com- 
pendium of Logic (generally Aldrich's), which is never 
omitted, and in the elements of Geometry and Algebra. 
All this is done in public. Eight candidates may be 
examined in one day, who are all present during the 
whole time ; and there is commonly a numerous attend- 
ance of Junior Students. Indeed there must of necessity 



30 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

be an audience, because every candidate is bound to 
attend one examination before he is examined himself. 
The number, however, far exceeds what the Statute 
requires, and the School is often quite full. The Examiners 
are four in number, especially appointed by the Univer- 
sity, and sworn to the faithful performance of their duty. 

"If the student fails on this occasion, it passes sub 
silentio. He does not receive his certificate at the close 
of the day ; and he may present himself again the next 
term. 

"After having passed this Examination his studies are 
directed more steadily to the other, where the honour he 
acquires will depend entirely on his own exertions. He 
cannot present himself till after the third year is com- 
pleted, and it is common to defer it till the end of the 
fourth year. He is then examined first in the rudiments 
of Religion : a passage in the Greek Testament is given 
him to construe, and he is tried by questions arising out 
of it, whether he has a proper view of the Christian 
scheme, and of the outline of sacred history. He is 
expected to give some account of the evidences of 
Christianity, and to shew by his answers that he is 
acquainted with the Thirty-nine Articles, and has read 
attentively some commentary upon them. He is examined 
again in Logic, the object being chiefly to see that he has 
just and firm conceptions of its leading principles; and, 
on this occasion, selections from the Organon are often 
introduced. 

" The Examination then proceeds to Rhetoric and 
Ethics. Upon these subjects the celebrated treatises of 
Aristotle are chiefly used : and whoever is master of them 
knows what an exercise of the mind it is to acquire a 
thorough insight into the argument, and what a serious 
discipline the student must have undergone, who has 
accomplished this point. . . To these is often added, 
at the option of the student, the treatise on Politics, 
which is in fact a continuation and a completion of the 
Ethical System. 

"Besides these treatises of Aristotle, Quintilian as 
belonging to Rhetoric, and the philosophical works of 
Cicero, especially the De Officiis, as belonging to Ethics, 
are admitted. And these last, as being easier of attain- 



BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 31 

ment, are of course the choice of many candidates. But 
neither of them are strictly indispensable. 

"In examining viva voce almost two hundred candi- 
dates every year, nearly in the same departments, much 
skill and care is requisite lest a certain routine of 
questions be introduced, which a student may learn, and 
give to them some plausible answers, without having 
drawn his knowledge from the original source. Nothing 
but practice and constant vigilance, joined to a familiar 
acquaintance with the several books, can effectually guard 
against this abuse. And hence, to a bystander, the Exami- 
nation may often seem vague and desultory, when the 
design only is, to probe the candidate here and there, and 
ascertain that his reading has been serious, not loose or 
superficial, or, as might sometimes happen, none at all. 

" At this Examination the student presents what 
number of Classical Authors he pleases, provided that they 
be not less than three, including both languages. It is 
not unusual for those who aim at the highest honours to 
mention Homer, Pindar, one, two, or three of the Greek 
Tragedians and Aristophanes. Thucydides is seldom 
omitted. The other historians, and the orators, are also 
included, according as the student's line of reading 
has been. Of Latin Authors, besides the poets of the 
Augustan age, Livy, Tacitus, Cicero, Juvenal and 
Lucretius, are the most usual. In the books that 
he names, he is expected to be well and accurately 
versed. . . 

"Besides the questions proposed viva voce, many others 
in the different branches of the Examination are put, and 
answered on paper, while other things are going on. And 
in this manner also the candidate's knowledge of Latinity 
is tried. 

"The Mathematical Examination is quite a distinct 
business. It is conducted indeed at the same time, but it 
is chiefly done on paper, if the student has advanced far 
in these studies; although for every candidate who 
presents himself in Mathematics there is an oral exami- 
nation, in which, with a table of diagrams before him, he is 
called upon, not to give full and long demonstrations, but, 
as the Examiner turns over a corresponding table, to 
answer questions relating to the properties of figures, and 



32 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

the mode of proving certain theorems. The soundness of 
his scientific studies is thus made known ; and he has 
problems, which require time and close attention, to solve 
at his leisure on paper, while the Examiner passes on 
to others. 

"It must be well known to every one who has had 
experience in life, that notwithstanding this formidable 
array of books and sciences, great numbers of candidates 
must be allowed to pass, whose attainments in both are, 
from various causes, very inconsiderable. Still if the 
system be so conducted as to encourage exertion, it would 
be absurd to reject those of the more moderate preten- 
sions, who have passed through their period of residence 
with good conduct, and a tolerably regular attention to 
the prescribed duties. Nothing but extreme incapacity, 
extraordinary want of school education, or gross idleness 
at the University, will absolutely exclude a student from 
his Degree at the regular time. Of this description some 
few are found every year. But even these are not finally 
rejected; they may appear at the following Examination, 
and, unless the same insufficiency is again observed, 
generally pass." 

A companion picture of the methods in vogue at Cam- 
bridge is to be found in Whewell's Of a Liberal Education, 
p. 169, where he says, "I will copy Dr. Jebb's account of the 
exercises and examinations as they existed in 1772. This 
account was applicable with little alteration till 1827." 

Dr. Jebb's account is as follows : — " The Moderators 
are annually chosen upon the 10th of October. Their 
proper office is to preside alternately, at the public 
exercises of the students ; and to examine them, at the 
time of their offering themselves for a Degree. 

" These public exercises are held in the afternoon, 
for five days in the week during term time ; the 
Moderator appearing a little before two, and frequently 
continuing in the schools till the clock strikes four. 

" Upon the first Monday after the commencement of 
the January term, the Moderator, whose turn it is to 
preside, gives written notice to one of the students in his 
list, that it is his pleasure he should appear in the schools, 
as a disputant, on that day fortnight. 

" This person, who is now called the respondent, in a 



BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 33 

few hours after he has received the summons, waits upon 
the Moderator with three propositions or questions ; the 
truth of which he is to maintain against the objections of 
any three students of the same year, whom the Moderator 
shall think proper to nominate, and who on this occasion 
are called ' opponents.' " 

Dr. Jebb then gives specimens of these questions 1 and 
continues : — 

"A fortnight for preparation being expired, the re- 
spondent appears in the schools; he ascends the rostrum 
and reads a Latin dissertation (called with us a ' thesis ') 
upon any one of the three questions he thinks proper ; 
the Moderator attending in his place. 

"As soon as the respondent has finished his thesis, 
which generally takes ten or fifteen minutes in the 
reading, the Moderator calls upon the first opponent to 
appear. He immediately ascends a rostrum opposite to 
the respondent, and proposes his 'arguments ' against the 
questions in syllogistical form. 

" Eight arguments, each consisting of three or four 
syllogisms, are brought up by the first opponent, five by 
the second, and three by the third. 

" When the exercise has for some time been carried on 
according to the strict rules of logic, the disputation 
insensibly slides into free and unconfined debate. . . 
The three opponents, having, in their turns, exhausted 
their whole stock of arguments, are dismissed by the 
Moderator in their order, with such a compliment 2 as in 
his estimation they deserve ; and the exercise closes with 
the dismission of the respondent in a similar manner. 

" The Moderator, upon his return to his chambers, 
records the merits of the disputants by marks, set oppo- 
site to their respective names. 

" This exercise, with the preparations for the subse- 
quent examination in January, appears to be sufficient 
employment for the last year. And the apprehension of 

1 They are three in number and read as follows : — 

Planetae primarii retinentur in orbitis suis vi gravitatis, et motu 
projectili. 

Iridis primariae et secundariae phoenomena solvi possunt ex 
principiis opticis. 

Non licet magistratui civem morti tradere nisi ob crimen homicidii. 
2 For instance, OpUme disputasti. Hence Senior and Junior 
Optimes. 



34 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

it is so alarming, that the student, after two years and a 
quarter's residence, during which time no proof whatever 
of his proficiency is required, frequently seeks to avoid 
the difficulty or disgrace, by commencing fellow-com- 
moner, 1 or, by declaring his intention of proceeding in 
Civil Law. 

" These exercises being duly performed, the Vice- 
Chancellor appoints three days, in the beginning of the 
January term, for the examination of the ' Questionists ' : 
this being the appellation of the students, during the last 
six weeks of their preparation. 

" The Moderators, some days before the arrival of the 
time prescribed, meet for the purpose of forming the 
students into divisions of six, eight, or ten, according to 
their performance in the schools, with a view to the 
ensuing examination. 

"Upon the first of the appointed days, at eight o'clock 
in the morning, the students enter the Senate House, 
preceded by a Master of Arts from each College, who, on 
this occasion, is called the 'Father' of the College to 
which he belongs. 

" After the Proctors have called over the names, each 
of the Moderators sends for a division of the students : 
they sit with him round a table, with pen, ink and paper 
before them: he enters upon his task of examination, and 
does not dismiss the set till the hour is expired. This 
Examination has now for some years been held in the 
English language. 

" The Examination is varied according to the abilities 
of the students. The Moderator generally begins with 
proposing some questions from the six books of Euclid, 
Plane Trigonometry, and the first rules of Algebra. 
From the elements of mathematics a transition is made 
to the four branches of philosophy, viz. Mechanics, 
Hydrostatics, apparent Astronomy, and Optics. If the 
Moderator finds the set of Questionists capable of answer- 
ing him, he proceeds to the eleventh and twelfth books of 
Euclid, Conic Sections, Spherical Trigonometry, the 

1 A Fellow-Commoner is an undergraduate who has commons, or in 
other words, dines with the Fellows at the high table in Hall, while the 
rest of the undergraduates sit at the lower tables. He pays higher fees 
for this privilege, and in the old days could take a Degree under easier 
conditions. 



BEGINNINGS OF CRITICISM. 35 

higher parts of Algebra, and Sir Isaac Newton's Principia. 
Having closed the philosophical examination, he some- 
times asks a few questions in Locke's Essay on the 
Human Understanding, Butler's Analogy, or Clarke's 
Attributes. But as the highest academical distinctions 
are invariably given to the best proficients in mathematics 
and natural philosophy, a very superficial knowledge in 
morality and metaphysics will suffice. 

" When the division under examination is one of the 
higher classes, problems are also proposed, with which the 
student retires to a distant part of the Senate House, and 
returns, with his solution upon paper, to the Moderator, 
who, at his leisure, compares it with the solutions of the 
other students. 

" When the clock strikes nine, the Questionists are dis- 
missed to breakfast : they return at half-past nine, and 
stay till eleven ; they go in again at half-past one, and 
stay till three ; and lastly, they return at half-past three, 
and stay till five. On the third day they are finally dis- 
missed at eleven." 

Dr. Jebb also describes the continual examination of 
the students by the Father of the College, and how the 
latter makes a report of a student's absolute or compara- 
tive merit to the Moderators, and to every other Father 
who should ask him the question. He continues : — 

" The Moderators and the Fathers meet at breakfast 
and dinner. From the variety of the reports, taken in 
connexion with their own examination, the former are 
enabled, about the close of the second day, so far to settle 
the comparative merits of the candidates, as to agree upon 
the names of four-and-twenty, who to them appear most 
deserving of being distinguished by marks of academical 
approbation. 

" These four-and-twenty are recommended to the 
Proctors, for their private examinations, and, if approved 
by them, their names are set down in two divisions, 
according to that order, in which they deserve to stand ; 
are afterwards printed ; and read over upon a solemn day, 
in the presence of the Vice-Chancellor and of the assembled 
University. The names of the twelve who appear next in 
descent are read over upon a day subsequent to the 
former. Four additional names are generally inserted in 



36 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

the former list (which is called the list of the Wranglers 
and Senior Oj)times), at the discretion of the Vice- 
Chancellor, two Proctors, and the Senior Regent. In the 
latter list, or that of Junior Optimes, the number of 
twelve is almost constantly adhered to." 

This was all that Oxford and Cambridge had to show 
in the way of knowledge-testing in the year 1800. The 
reader can now form his own opinion on the merits of the 
dispute between the Edinburgh Review and Copleston. 



CHAPTER III. 

THE SECOND ATTACK BY THE EDINBURGH 
REVIEW. 

The second attack of the Edinburgh Review on the 
ancient Universities began in 1831 and continued till 
1836. Sir William Hamilton was now the assailant, and 
his articles are to be found in the Education section of 
his collected Discussions, and the Education Appendix 
which contains his latest contribution to this subject. 1 
He was well-equipped for the contest, for, as may be 
learned from the Dictionary of National Biography, he 
was himself an Oxford man, having entered Balliol College 
in 1807. The neglect of an eccentric Tutor left him to 
manage his own studies. So well did he look after 
himself that he gained the reputation of being the most 
learned Aristotelian in Oxford. He took a First Class 
in Litterae Humaniores, but did not obtain a Fellowship. 
He afterwards became Professor of Philosophy at Edin- 
burgh, and was thus acquainted with two Universities 
from the inside. His unfortunate experiences at Oxford 
may to some extent account for the asperity with which 
he conducts his controversy with her. 

Cardinal Newman, in the extract quoted above, says, 
" The second charge brought against its (Oxford's) studies 
was their connexion with a particular form of religious 
belief, or, in other words, their religious ejccliisiveness." 
This is by no means an adequate statement of the facts. 
It is true that Hamilton wrote an article, published in 
October 1834, " On the right of Dissenters to admission 
into the English Universities," 2 and a supplemental 
article on the same subject in January 1835/ but they 
are far exceeded in importance by his five other articles 
on the general question of University Reform. Of these 
the chief is that headed "Of the state of the English 

i The second edition is the one quoted from. 

2 Edinburgh Revieio, Vol. LX., No. cxxi., pp. 202-230. 

3 lb. Vol. LX., No. cxxii., pp. 422-445. 



38 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Universities, with more especial reference to Oxford," 
published in June 1831 ' and a supplemental article bear- 
ing the same title published in December 1831. To 
these was afterwards added an Appendix, " On a Reform 
of the English Universities : with especial reference to 
Oxford ; and limited to the Faculty of Arts." 2 In the 
Discussions the five articles are not given in strict 
chronological order, the four already mentioned being 
preceded by an article published in the Edinburgh 
Review in January 1836. This arrangement is doubtless 
intentional, as will now be shown. 

In 1835 Dr. Whewell, then Senior Tutor of Trinity 
College, Cambridge, published a pamphlet entitled 
Thong Jits on the Study of Mathematics as a part of a 
Liberal Education. It ran to between 40 and 50 octavo 
pages. The first few pages discuss the respective merits 
of mathematics and logic as aids to exact reasoning ; the 
middle part sets forth various points in which the writer 
considered current mathematical teaching to be wrong, 
and finally we reach the practical inferences which 
Whewell wishes to be drawn from what has gone before. 
This modest publication produced a furious onslaught 
from Hamilton, who was against anything beyond an 
irreducible minimum of mathematics as a part of a 
liberal education. 3 Mathematics, he contended, were 
not philosophy, nor an improving study, did not 
conduce to generalisation, were not a logical study, 
nor a logical exercise ; on the contrary, they induced 
credulity and scepticism. It would have been un- 
necessary to refer to this controversy, but for the fact 
that Hamilton incidentally dealt some shrewd blows 
at Cambridge and its favourite study. " The centre," he 
writes, " from which (this pamphlet) proceeds, enhances 
also the interest of the publication. In opposition to the 
general opinion of the learned world, — in opposition to 
the practice of all other Universities, past or present, — 

1 Edinburgh Review, Vol. LIII., No. cvi., pp. 384-427, and Vol. LIV., 
No. cviii., pp. 478-504. Republished in the Discussions at pp. 401 and 450. 

2 Discussions, p. 742. 

:i See his article "On the Study of Mathematics as an Exercise of 
Mind." Edinburgh Revieiv, Vol. LXII., No. cxxvi., pp. 409-455. Discus- 
sions, p. 263. 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 39 

in opposition even to its oaths and statutes, the University 
of Cambridge stands alone in now making mathematical 
science the principal object of the whole liberal education 
it affords ; and mathematical skill the sole condition of 
the one tripos of its honours, and the necessary pass- 
port to the other:— thus restricting to the narrowest 
proficiency all places of distinction and emolument 
in University and College, to which such honours 
constitute a claim;— thus also leaving the immense 
majority of its alumni without incitement, and the 
most arduous and important studies void of encourage- 
ment and reward. It is true, indeed, that the effect 
of this contracted tendency of the public University 
is, in some degree, tempered by certain favourable 
accidents in the constitution of more than one of its 
private colleges ; but with every allowance for petty and 
precarious counteraction, and latterly for some very 
inadequate legislation, the University of Cambridge, 
unless it can demonstrate that mathematical study is 
the one best, if not the one exclusive, means of a general 
evolution of our faculties, must be held to have established 
and maintained a scheme of discipline, more partial and 
inadequate than any other which the history of education 
records. That no Cambridge mathematician has yet been 
found to essay this demonstration, so necessary for his 
University, so honourable to his science, has always 
appeared to us a virtual admission, that the thesis was 
incapable of defence." ! 

Whewell sent a letter to the Edinburgh Revieiv com- 
plaining that the Reviewer had not fairly stated the 
purport of his pamphlet. Hamilton retorted with a note 
of great length. This time he has a slash at the Colleges 
as well as at the University. In a note to his note 2 he 
says : " It is only a private and intrusive interest which 
has there (at Cambridge) superseded the public seminary, 
and this has calculated for the advantage of its members, 
and not for the national good, the education which Cam- 
bridge has long been permitted to dispense. This private 
interest is that of the Colleges and of their Tutors ; and 
in Cambridge there has for generations been taught, 

1 Discissions, pp. 264-5. 2 lb., p. 333. 



40 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

not what the ends of education, not what the ends 
of science prescribe, but only what, and that what 
hoiv, the College Tutors are capable of teaching. It 
would be here out of place (and is indeed done else- 
where) to explain the manner in which a mere Collegio- 
Tutorial instruction must be scanty and mechanical, and 
why the mechanism once made up, remains, and must 
remain, long after the opinions which it chances to 
comprehend and teach are elsewhere exploded. Suffice it 
for an example, to take the remarkable, the notorious fact : 
that fifty, that sixty years after Newton had published 
his Principia, the physical hypothesis of Descartes was 
still tutorially inculcated in Newton's own University. 
In fact, I believe that the Cambridge Colleges were about 
the last seminaries throughout Europe in which the 
Newtonian doctrine superseded the Cartesian, and this 
too in opposition to the Professorial authority of Newton 
himself, and of his successors in the Public Chair. And 
why ? Simply, because in these Colleges, instruction was 
dispensed by Tutors, for their own convenience and 
advantage ; and these Tutors, educated in the old routine, 
were unable or unwilling to re-educate themselves for 
teachers of the new truth. This is an example of the 
value of Collegial, of Tutorial, authority in Cambridge ; 
and we may be sure, that whatever are the subjects com- 
prised in the tutorial mechanism of the time, will be 
clamorously asserted by the collegial interest to be the 
best possible subjects of academical education ; while all 
beyond it, all especially that cannot be reduced to a 
catechetical routine, will be as clamorously decried." 

These extracts may be regarded as merely the skir- 
mishes subsidiary to the main attack, but they show the 
line it was to take — a line which Hamilton followed with 
a persistency and a vehemence almost amounting to an 
obsession. This main attack had been made by Hamilton 
in June 1831, in the article already mentioned, " Of the 
state of the English Universities, with more especial refer- 
ence to Oxford." The year, as everyone knows, was one 
of great political excitement which culminated in the 
passage of the first Reform Bill in 1832. " This is the age 
of reform," begins Hamilton. " Next in importance to our 
religious and political establishments, are the foundations 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 41 

for public education ; and having now seriously engaged 
in a reform of ' the constitution, the envy of surrounding 
nations,' the time cannot be distant for a reform in the 
schools and universities which have hardly avoided their 
contempt. . . We commence with Oxford. This 
University is entitled to precedence, from its venerable 
antiquity, its ancient fame, the wealth of its endowments, 
and the importance of its privileges." l 

The plan of campaign is shown in the following 
sentence: "It is not in demonstrating the imperfection of 
the present system, that we principally ground a hope 
of its improvement ; it is in demonstrating its 
illegality. . . It will not surely be contended that 
matters should continue as they are, if it can be shown 
that, as now administered, the University pretends 
only to accomplish a petty fraction of the ends proposed 
to it by law, and attempts even this only by illegal 
means." 

To effect this object Hamilton employs the historical 
method. " When this article was written," he says, 
" the history of our oldest Universities had fallen into 
oblivion ; their parts and principles were not understood, 
even by themselves ; nay, opinions universally accepted 
touching the most essential points of their constitution, 
were not only erroneous, but precisely the reverse of truth. 
Criticism was therefore requisite ; and a correction of the 
more important errors, — this a collection of original 
documents, which I had succeeded in forming, has 
enabled me (I hope unostentatiously) to accomplish. . . 
The vices of the present system have been observed, 
and frequently discussed ; but as it has never been 
shown in what manner these vices were generated, so 
it has never been perceived how easily their removal 
might be enforced. 

" It is generally believed that, however imperfect 
in itself, the actual mechanism of education organ- 
ised in these seminaries (Oxford and Cambridge) 
is a time-honoured and essential part of their being, 
established upon statute, endowed by the national 
legislature with exclusive privileges, and inviolable as 

1 Discussions, pp. 401, 402. 



42 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 

a vested right. We shall prove, on the contrary, that 
it is as new as it is inexpedient, — not only accidental to 
the University, but radically subversive of its con- 
stitution, — without legal sanction, nay, in violation of 
positive law, — arrogating the privileges exclusively con- 
ceded to another system, which it has superseded, — and 
so far from being defensible by those it profits, as a 
right, that it is a flagrant usurpation, obtained through 
perjury, and only tolerated from neglect." ' Illegality and 
perjury — these are the terms which continually recur 
throughout all the articles. 

Hamilton next sets forth the nature and constitution 
of the two Universities. 

" Oxford and Cambridge, as establishments for 
education, consist of two parts, — of the University proper, 
and the Colleges. The former, original and essential, is 
founded, controlled and privileged by public authority, for 
the advantage of the nation. The latter, accessory and 
contingent, are created, regulated and endowed by private 
munificence, for the interest of certain favoured 
individuals. Time was, when the Colleges did not exist, 
and the University was there ; and were the Colleges again 
abolished, the University would remain entire. The 
former, founded solely for education, exists only as it 
accomplishes the end of its institution ; the latter, 
founded principally for aliment and habitation, would 
still exist, were all education abandoned within their 
walls. The University, as a national establishment, is 
necessarily open to the lieges in general ; the Colleges, as 
private institutions, might universally do, as some have 
actually done, — close their gates upon all, except their 
foundation members. 

"The University and the Colleges are thus neither 
identical, nor vicarious of each other. If the University 
ceases to perform its functions, it ceases to exist ; and the 
privileges accorded by the nation to the system of public 
education legally organised in the University, cannot, 
without the consent of the nation, — far less without the 
consent of the academical legislature, — be lawfully 
transferred to the system of private education pre- 

i lb. pp. 400, 403. 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 43 

cariously organised in the Colleges, over which neither 
the State nor the University has any control. They have, 
however, been unlawfully usurped." 

The result is thus depicted:—" Through the suspension 
of the University, and the usurpation of its functions and 
privileges by the Collegial bodies, there has arisen the 
second of two systems, diametrically opposite to each 
other. The one, in which the University was paramount, 
is ancient and statutory ; the other, in which the Colleges 
have the ascendant, is recent and illegal. In the former, 
all was subservient to public utility, and the interests of 
science ; in the latter, all is sacrificed to private monopoly, 
and to the convenience of the teacher. The former 
amplified the means of education in accommodation to 
the mighty end which a University proposes ; the latter 
limits the end which the University attempts to the 
capacity of the petty instruments which the intrusive 
system employs. — The one afforded education in all the 
Faculties; the other professes to furnish only elementary 
tuition in the lowest. In the authorised system, the cycle 
of instruction was distributed among a body of teachers, 
all professedly chosen for merit, and each concentrating 
his ability on a single object; in the unauthorised, every 
branch, necessary to be learned, is monopolised by an 
individual, privileged to teach all, though probably ill- 
qualified to teach any. — The old system daily collected 
into large classes, under the same Professor, the whole 
youth of the University of equal standing, and thus 
rendered possible a keen and constant and unremitted 
competition ; the new, which elevates the Colleges and 
Halls into so many little Universities, and in these houses 
distributes the students, without regard to ability or 
standing, among some fifty Tutors, frustrates all emulation 
among the members of its small and ill-assorted classes. — 
In the superseded system, the Degrees in all the Faculties 
were solemn testimonials that the graduate had 
accomplished a regular course of study in the public 
schools of the University, and approved his competence 
by exercise and examination ; and on these Degrees, only 
as such testimonials, and solely for the public good, were 
there bestowed by the civil legislature, great and exclusive 
privileges, in the Church, in the Courts of Law, and in the 



44 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

practice of medicine. In the superseding system, Degrees 
in all the Faculties, except the lowest department of the 
lowest, certify neither a course of academical study, nor 
any ascertained proficiency in the graduate ; and these 
now nominal distinctions retain their privileges to the 
public detriment, and for the benefit only of those by 
whom they have been deprived of their significance." : 

Hamilton having thus stated his case in general 
terms proceeds to prove it in detail. He first briefly sets 
forth the system de jure. As was pointed out in the 
Introductory Chapter of this book, the Corpus Statutqrufn 
by which Oxford was nominally governed in 1831 was 
that drawn up under the influence of Laud, and solemnly 
ratified by King, Chancellor and Convocation in 1636. 
In 1831 every member of the University was still 
solemnly bound by oath and subscription to their 
faithful observance. It will be seen hereafter how 
much Hamilton makes of this last fact. He then points 
out that in the original constitution of Oxford, the 
University was governed and taught by the graduates at 
large. Professor, Master, Doctor were originally synony- 
mous. Every graduate was under the obligation of teach- 
ing publicly, for a certain period, the subjects of his 
Faculty, for such was the condition involved in the grant 
of the Degree itself. A Bachelor, or imperfect graduate, 
was bound to read a course of lectures under a Master or 
Doctor in his Faculty ; and the Master, Doctor or perfect 
graduate was, after his promotion, obliged immediately 
to commence, (incipere,) and to continue for a certain 
period publicly to teach, (regere,) some at least of the sub- 
jects appertaining to his Faculty. Such men were called 
necessary regents, but as there were many voluntary 
regents, the original period of necessary regency was 
once again abbreviated, and even a dispensation from 
actual teaching, during its continuance, commonly 
allowed. The Regents alone were allowed to enjoy full 
privileges in University legislation and government ; in 
Oxford, the Regents constituted the House of Congrega- 
tion, while the House of Convocation consisted of all the 
Regents and non-Regents resident in the University. It 

i lb. pp. 404, 405. 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 45 

was only by a fiction that those were subsequently held 
to be Convictores, or actual residents in the University, 
who retained their names on the books of a Hall or 
College. 1 

This system of instruction by the graduates at large 
was modified by the rise of the Professors. The Regents 
were entitled to exact from their auditors a certain 
regulated fee. To relieve the scholars of this burden, and 
to secure the services of able teachers, salaries were some- 
times given to certain graduates, on consideration of 
their delivery of lectures without collect or fee. It was 
to these salaried graduates that the title of Professors 
was at last peculiarly attributed. The unsalaried Regents 
found their schools deserted for the gratuitous instruc- 
tion of the privileged lecturers, and so dispensation from 
teaching came to be universally accorded to the other 
graduates. " The scheme thus established in law, though 
now abolished in fact, is as follows: — Education is 
afforded in all the Faculties in which Degrees are granted, 
by the University itself, through its accredited organs, the 
Public Readers or Professors — a regular attendance on 
whose lectures during a stated period is in every Faculty 
indispensably requisite to qualify for a Degree." 

Hamilton next sketches the rise of the Tutorial 
system which was destined so largely to overshadow 
the Professorial. He says, " But besides the public 
and principal means of instruction afforded by the 
Professors and other Regents in the University, 
the student was subjected until his first Degree to the 
subsidiary and private discipline of a Tutor in the 
Hall or College to which he belonged." This step 
was rendered necessary by the extreme youthfulness of 
the undergraduates. " With this, however, as a merely 
private concern, the University did not interfere ; . . 
the Tutorial office was viewed as one of very subordinate 
importance in the statutory system. To commence tutor, 
it was only necessary for a student to have the lowest 
Degree in Arts, and that his learning and character should 
be approved by the Head of his House, or, in the event of 
controversy on this point, by the Vice-Chancellor. All 
that was expected of him was ' to imbue his pupils with 

1 lb. note, p. 407. 



46 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

good principles and institute them in approved authors ; 
but above all in the rudiments of religion, and the 
doctrine of the Thirty-nine Articles. . . It is also his 
duty to contain his pupils within statutory regulations 
in matters of external appearance, such as their 
clothes, boots and hair ; which if the pupils are found to 
transgress, the Tutor for the first, second, and third 
offence, shall forfeit six and eightpence, and for the fourth, 
shall be interdicted from his tutorial function by the Vice- 
Chancellor." " Who could have anticipated from this 
Statute," exclaims Hamilton, " what the Tutor was ultim- 
ately to become '? " * 

But if the above be the theory, the existing fact is far 
different. " The University is in abeyance. . . In none of 
the Faculties is it supposed that the Professors any longer 
furnish the instruction necessary for a degree. . . It 
is not even pretended that Oxford any longer supplies 
more than the preliminary of an academical education. 
Even this is not afforded by the University but is aban- 
doned to the Colleges and Halls; and now, therefore, 
Oxford is not one public University, but merely a collection 
of many private schools. The University, in fact, exists 
only in semblance, for the behoof of the unauthorised 
seminaries by which it has been replaced, -and which 
have contrived, under covert of its name, to slip into 
possession of its public privileges." Hamilton here cites 
the passage quoted above from p. 183 of Copleston's 
Reply, that " The University of Oxford is not a national 
foundation," and remarks that it shows " how completely 
the University is annihilated,— how completely even all 
memory of its history, all knowledge of its constitution, have 
perished at Oxford. He quotes in refutation Dr. Wallis, 
some time Registrar, who speaks of the " Colleges which 
we now have being accidental to the corporation of the 
University." 

Hamilton continues : — "As academical education was 
usurped by the Tutors from the Professors,— so all 
tutorial education was usurped by the Fellows from the 
other graduates. The Fellows exclusively teach all that 
Oxford now deems necessary to be taught ; . . (but) as 

1 lb. p. 411. 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 47 

the Fellowships were not founded for the purposes of 
teaching, so the qualifications that constitute a Fellow 
are not those that constitute an instructor. The ' close ' 
system of Fellowships was, of course, to blame for this 
result. As at present organised, it is a doubtful problem 
whether the Tutorial system ought not to be abated as a 
nuisance. . . But the Tutorial system as now dominant 
in Oxford is vicious : 1st, in its application, as usurping 
the place of the Professorial, whose functions it is inade- 
quate to discharge ; 2nd, in its constitution — the Tutors 
as now appointed being incompetent even for subsidiary 
instruction." 1 

Hamilton then turns to his second subject of 
consideration : — " How the English Universities, and in 
particular Oxford, passed from a legal to an illegal 
state, and from public, were degraded into private, 
schools ? — The answer is precise : This ivas effected solely 
by the influence, and exclusively for the advantage of the 
Colleges." To support his contention he gives a sketch 
of the Collegial system as it sprang up and developed in 
Paris, Louvain, and Germany, and more especially at 
Oxford. At the latter place the steps were three : — 

(1) By the beginning of the fifteenth century it had 
become established by law that all scholars should be 
members of some College, Hall, or Entry, under a 
responsible Head. The latter houses of community, 
variously called Halls, Inns, Hostels, Entries, were 
governed by statutes established by the University, by 
whom also they were visited and reformed, and adminis- 
tered by a Principal, elected by the scholars themselves, 
but admitted to his office by the Chancellor on finding 
caution for payment of the rent. In a few Houses, 
foundations were made for the support of a certain 
number of indigent scholars, who were incorporated as 
Fellows (or joint participators in the endowment), under 
the government of a Head. But a mistake was made in 
not limiting these benefactions to learners and in- 
structors, while the subjection of the Colleges to private 
statutes and their emancipation from the control of the 
academical authorities, gave them interests apart from 

i lb. p. 417. 



48 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

those of the public and rendered them instead of aids to 
the Universities, the worst impediments to their utility. 
" The Colleges, into which Commoners, or members not 
on the foundation, were, until a comparatively modern 
date, rarely admitted, (and this admission, be it noted, is 
to the present hour wholly optional) remained for many 
centuries few in comparison with the Halls. The 
Reformation played havoc with the Halls. 1 From being 
thirty at the beginning of the fifteenth century, they had 
fallen at Oxford to four or five in 1831. The collegial 
interest, being thus left without a counterpoise, was 
soon able to establish an absolute supremacy in the 
University. 2 " 

(2) The Fellows next monopolised the office of Tutor. 
By University law, graduates were not compelled to lodge 
in College ; Colleges therefore excluded them to make 
room for undergraduates who paid fees, and also to prevent 
their becoming Tutors. Sir William Hamilton, in his 
supplemental article further elaborates this point.' 
" All inconveniences and dangers would be obviated, and 
profitably obviated, if standing on College books were 
allowed to count for statutory residence in the Univer- 
sity. By this expedient (which we have failed formerly 
to notice) a revenue of indefinite amount might be realized 
to the Colleges, by taxing standing on their books with 
the dues exigible from actual residence;" 

(3) Collegial tuition thus finally displacing Pro- 
fessorial tuition, the University was silently annihilated, 
and the Colleges succeeded to its privileges, and its place. 
Not that this end was ever clearly proposed, or a line of 
policy for its attainment ever systematically followed out. 
But circumstances concurred, and the instinct of self- 
interest determined a result such as no sagacity would 
have anticipated as possible. 

It was Laud who changed the original republican 
polity into an oligarchy. " The government of the Uni- 
versity (of Oxford) was of old exclusively committed to 
the Masters and Doctors assembled in Congregation and 
Convocation; Heads of Houses and College Fellows 

1 In Cambridge they were known as Hostels. These came to an end 
in 1540. The Halls there are Colleges, i.e. incorporated foundations. 
lib. p. 432. 3 lb. p. 459. 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 49 

shared in academical government only as they were 
full Graduates, and as they were Regents." Laud left the 
legislation and the supreme government with the full 
graduates, but he clothed the Heads of Houses with an 
authority which rendered them the sole administrators 
of the University weal. The Vice-Chancellor, (now also 
necessarily a College Head,) the Heads of Houses and the 
two Proctors were constituted into a Hebdomadal Meet- 
ing, and no proposal could be submitted to Congregation 
or Convocation unless it had been previously sanctioned 
by the Meeting. The interests and the duties of the 
Heads were thus diametrically opposed. By statute they 
were bound to maintain and improve the University or 
Professorial system of teaching. Their interests lay in 
the aggrandisement of their own Colleges, and their 
interests prevailed. " The Professorial system, though 
still imperfect, could without difficulty have been carried 
to unlimited perfection ; but the Heads fostered its 
defects, in order to precipitate its fall. 1 . . With the 
Colleges and Fellows it was all or nothing. If they 
were not to continue, as they had been, mere acces- 
sories to the University, it behoved to quasJi the 
whole public lectures and to dispense ivith residence 
after the elementary degree. This the Heads of Houses 
easily effected." 2 

Hamilton uses much strong language on this point. 
He says 3 : "The great interests of the nation, of the 
Church, and of the professions were sacrificed to the 
paltry ends of a few contemptible Corporations ; and the 
privileges by law accorded to the public University of 
Oxford, as the authorised organ of national education, 
were by its perfidious governors furtively transferred to 
the unauthorised absurdities of their private — of their 
domestic discipline"; and again: "The Heads of Houses 
rather than expose the College usurpations to a discussion 
by the academical and civil legislatures, not only sub- 
mitted to the disgrace of leaving their smuggled system 
of education without a legal sanction, but actually 
tolerated the reproach of thus converting the great 
seminary of the English Church into a school of perjury, 

1 p. 438. 2 pp. 440-1. s p. 441. E 



50 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

without, as far as we know, an effort either at vindication 
or amendment." He grounds this charge on the oath 
which undergraduates took on entrance, and repeated 
at each step of graduation. The Statutes which are thus 
sworn to, " establish the University on the system of 
Professorial instruction, and they do not come under 
the power of Dispensation." Hamilton quotes from the 
" Epinomis or explanation of the oatli taken by all" this 
passage among others : " Finally as the reverence due 
to their character exempts the Magistrates of the 
University from the common penalties of other trans- 
gressors so on them there is incumbent a stronger consci- 
entious obligation. . . But since the keeping and 
guardianship of the Statutes is intrusted to their fidelity, 
if (may it never happen) through their negligence or 
sloth, they suffer any statutes whatever to fall into 
desuetude, and silently, as it were to be abrogated, in 
that event, we decree them guilty of broken faith 

AND OF PERJURY." l 

As a remedy for the evils complained of Hamilton 
advocated a visitation by the Crown, doubtless in the 
shape of a Royal Commission. Public opinion, however 
enlightened, could not "be expected to induce a majority 
of the collegial bodies voluntarily to surrender the mono- 
poly they have so long enjoyed, and to descend to a 
subordinate position, after having occupied a principal. 
All experience proves, that Universities, like other Cor- 
porations, can only be reformed from without. A Com- 
mittee of Visitation has lately terminated its labours on 
the Scottish Universities : we should anticipate a more 
important result from a similar, and far more necessary, 
inquiry into the corruptions of those of England." 2 

The Oxford reply came speedily in the shape of a 
bulky pamphlet entitled " The Legality of the present 
Academical System of the University of Oxford asserted 
against the new Calumnies of the Edinburgh Review." 
Hamilton made answer in a second article in the 
Edinburgh Revieiv, 3 which he terms an "amplified re- 
capitulation" of his first. The reply and the counter- 
reply are a melancholy example of the tendency of con- 

l lb. p. 445. 2 lb. pp. 448, 449. 

3 Vol. LIV., No. cviii., pp. 478-504. 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 51 

troversy to evolve heat rather than light. All criticisms 
of the Universities are " calumnies," and Hamilton writes 
thus of the Oxford pamphlet, " The plain scope of the 
publication is to defend perjury by imposture; and its 
contents are one tissue of disingenuous concealments, 
false assertions, forged quotations, and infuriate rail- 
ings." 1 In an " amplified recapitulation " there is neces- 
sarily much repetition, but some additional facts of minor 
importance are given in support of the " formal charge of 
Illegality, Treason, Perjury and Corruption."* 

It may be noted that Hamilton here makes plain the 
quarter from which he hoped for deliverance. " A Royal or 
Parliamentary visitation is the easy and appropriate 
way of solving the difficulty." Before the Leicester and 
Laud legislation " the University possessed within itself 
the ordinary means of reform ; Convocation frequently 
appointed delegates to inquire into abuses, and to take 
counsel for the welfare and melioration of the establish- 
ment. But by bestowing on a private body, like the 
Heads, the exclusive guardianship of the Statutes, and 
the initiative of every legal measure, Convocation was 
deprived of the power of active interference. . . To 
the administrators of the State, rather than to the 
administrators of the University are thus primarily to 
be attributed the corruptions of Oxford. To them, like- 
wise, must we look for their removal. The Crown is, in 
fact, bound, in justice to the nation, to restore the Uni- 
versity against the consequences of its own imprudence 
and neglect. And as it ought, so is it alone able. . . 
With a patriot King, a reforming Ministry, and a reformed 
Parliament, we are confident that our expectations will 
not be vain. A general scholastic reform will be, in fact, 
one of the greatest blessings of the political renovation, 
and, perhaps, the surest test of its value." 3 These high 
hopes were not realised till 1850, and then only partially. 

As Newman points out, Hamilton also discussed the 
" religious exclusiveness " of the two Universities. But 
even when he was affirming the right of Dissenters to 
admission into the English Universities, he could only 
view the question from the standpoint which he had 

i Discissions, p. 454. 2 lb. p. 452. 8 lb. pp. 471-472. 



52 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

made so peculiarly his own. He makes this fact abund- 
antly clear by the first sentence of his article • : — " The 
whole difficulty of the question, in regard to the admission 
of Dissenters into the English Universities, lies in the 
present anomalous state — we do not say constitution — of 
these establishments. In them the University, properly 
so called, i.e. the necessary national establishment for 
general education, is at present illegally suspended, and 
its function usurped, but not performed, by a number of 
private institutions which have sprung up in accidental 
connection with it, named Colleges." 

Hamilton thus found himself in a difficulty. " The 
claim," he writes, " of the Dissenters to admission into the 
public University cannot justly be refused," but there was, 
in his view, no public University into which to admit 
them. He adds : " The actual, that is the present, right of 
the Colleges, as private establishments, to close their 
gates on all but members of their own foundations, can- 
not be denied ; independently of this right, the expediency 
is worse than doubtful, either, on the one hand, of forcing 
a College to receive inmates, not bound to accommodate 
themselves to its religious observances, or, on the other, 
of exacting from those entitled to admission, conformity 
to religious observances, in opposition to their faith." 2 
His solution is to be found in the following words 3 : "We 
think the difficulty may be overcome, by simply returning 
to the ancient practice of the English Universities, in 
regard to the easy establishment of Halls or Hostels." 
Hamilton's second article on this subject goes over the 
whole ground again and the charge of perjury appears 
once more in capital letters. Those who are curious in 
this last matter may consult the passage beginning 
"Oxford is now a national school of perjury." 4 

Hamilton afterwards published an Appendix, " On a 
reform of the English Universities, with especial reference 
to Oxford ; and limited to the Faculty of Arts." 5 Internal 
evidence shows that it was written in 1847 and revised in 
1853. Though it was not published in the Edinburgh 
Review it was promised in the first of the two articles 

1 Edinburgh Review, Oct. 1834. 2 Discussions, p. 479. 

s lb. p. 489. 4 Ib. pp. 553-554. 5 lb. pp. 742-832. 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 53 

already dealt with, and may be most conveniently 
considered in connexion therewith. It is divided into 
two parts, Oxford as it is, and Oxford as it might be. 
The first begins with an elaborate investigation into 
the merits of the various Oxford Colleges as tested 
by their successes in the Schools during the ten-year 
period ending in 1847. Balliol then as now stands at 
the head of the list, while "four Houses (two Colleges 
and two Halls), containing above a hundred under- 
graduates, have during the decade no First Class 
Honours at all." This in Litterae Humaniores. In 
Disciplinae Mathematicae, "seven Houses (three Colleges 
and four Halls), and with an average of undergraduates 
considerably above two hundred, shew no First Class 
Honours ; and of these, two (a College and a Hall) have 
no Honours, even of the lowest" The conclusion is that 
" some of the Oxford Houses, throwing out the worst, and 
judging only by the most favourable criterion — that some 
of the Oxford Houses now perform, as academical instru- 
ments,— five, — ten,— fifteen, — ay twenty times more than 
others." By a further table efficiency is proved to vary 
directly as the qualifications of the Instructors. " Only 
a single College (Balliol) has all its instructors, and these 
amount to five, of the Highest Class ; Avhereas, in three, 
no instructor whatever exhibited a similar Honour." 

Hamilton then passes to " the remarkable contrast 
of a College with itself, in respect of its comparative 
efficiency at one period, and its comparative inefficiency 
at another," and illustrates this fact by the case of 
Christ Church, during the thirty years from the first 
institution of classified examinations for the degree in 
1807, and also the ten years from 1838 to 1847 inclusive. 
Taking Double Firsts, in the three decades, Christ 
Church has twenty-nine, whilst all the other Houses 
have, among them, only thirty-two, i.e. Christ Church 
has in proportion to its undergraduates 1 in 6, and the 
rest of the University 1 in 42. In the one decade 
(1838-1847) things are marvellously changed. " For while 
the other Houses maintain the proportion of 1 in 45 ; 
Christ Church, having now no Double First, sinks to 
the negative proportion of in 186, — disappears." 
Similar results are obtained by comparing the Honours 



54 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

in Litterae Human iores and Mathematics. " Such is the 
remarkable contrast of a College, in the spirit of study, 
to itself ; Christ Church, in the former period, rising as 
proudly far above the level of the University, as, in the 
latter, it has subsided humbly far beneath it." 

Of the defects here mentioned one has practically 
disappeared. The cases of a man of inferior degree being 
elected to a College office either at Oxford or Cambridge 
are now very rare. The inequality of the work done by 
the individual Colleges and their fluctuations both in 
numbers and efficiency still remain, and will some day 
attract the attention they deserve. 

Oxford as it might be begins with an examination 
into the abstract ends of Universities in general. These 
are defined as three : — (1) " to supply competent 
instruction ; (2) to excite the requisite exertion ; and 
(3) to grant a true certificate of proficiency." ' The ends 
are subsequently expanded into : — 

First as to what a University should teach. "As 
a University cannot teach the omne scibile, and as there 
is an order and subordination among the departments 
of knowledge ; a University is bound to secure by pre- 
ference those studies which are necessary, not only on 
their own account, but for the sake of ulterior progress. 
In other words : a University, though it cannot compass 
the cycle of knowledge, is required to supply its intro- 
duction. This manifest principle has, however, too 
frequently been neglected in our modern Universities 
— nay even reversed. Teaching everything, they teach 
nothing." 2 

Second end. "A University should supply competent, 
and exclude incompetent instructors." 

Third end. "A University should place conspicu- 
ously before the eyes of the student high living examples 
of erudition and ability." 

Fourth end. "A University is bound to supply 
such external incitement to the student as may render 
his studies more pleasurable than their intermission," 
i.e. there must be "the refreshment of honour, and the 
stimulus of competition." 

i lb. p. 764. 2 lb. p. 76-5. 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 55 

Fifth end. " A University, in its liberal faculty, 
should prefer those objects of study which call forth 
the strongest and most unexclusive energy of thought." 
Its educational exercises should be 1. Examination ; 
2. Disputation ; 3. Repetition ; 4. Written Composition ; 
5. Teaching in order to learn ; 6. Conversation with, 
and questioning of the learned ; 7. Social study. 

Sixth end. "A University is further bound to 
grant Degrees." 

Seventh end. A University ought to teach the 
physical sciences because they require costly experi- 
ments, apparatus and collected objects. 1 Later on he 
says, " The knowledge which depends on the ocular 
demonstration of costly collections and experiments; — 
this knowledge, easy and palpable, requiring an appliance 
more of the senses than of the understanding, can be 
fully taught to all, at once, by one competent demonstra- 
tor. The teaching of the natural sciences, therefore, 
ought to be Professional." 

Eighth end. " A University ought to supply a comple- 
ment of books with every convenience for consultation 
and reading." 

Ninth end. " A University should likewise possess a 
competent board of regulation and academical patronage." 

Tenth end. " A University should be able to offer 
some not inadequate reward for the ability and learning 
required in its instructors," in other words, teaching 
ought to be made a career. 

Eleventh end. A University ought to have a Pension 
Fund. 

Twelfth end and last. A University should, if 
possible, afford to its alumni the means of living 
academically together. 2 But if certain conditions are 
not fulfilled, the evil of such an arrangement may greatly 
outweigh the good ; but the enforcement of this regula- 
tion should not act as a tax. The students should be 
able to live as cheaply in the privileged Houses of a 
University as they could in private lodgings. 

i Hamilton regarded the Natural Sciences as peculiarly fitted to the 
Pass or Poll Man, whom he would retain (p. 761). 

2 lb. p. 785. 



56 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

The Third Part is entitled " Comparison of the Means 
now at work, especially in Oxford, and the Ends there 
actually effected, with the Ends which a University ought 
to accomplish." The great criticism here is that Oxford 
and the rest of the Universities do not teach Philosophy. 

Oxford is next tested by each of the above twelve ends, 
and is found to be deficient in every case. 

Finally Hamilton turns to " Oxford as it might be." 
" I do not mean," he writes, " to hazard the suggestion 
of measures which would realise the ideal of a perfect 
University. It is self-evident that if Fellowships and 
Headships, etc., were made the just rewards of academical 
merit, these offices would constitute an apparatus of 
powerful agencies, which, as they have hitherto impeded, 
would now be turned to promote the ends of the 
University. But this, however I may wish, I would not 
venture to propose." The present generation of reformers 
may with good reason be more courageous. 

Hamilton continues, " In restoring the public reality 
of education against the private and usurping semblance 
— in restoring the University against the Colleges, we 
ought not to imitate the precedent of the Houses, we 
ought not to swamp them. Our policy should be directly 
the converse. Let ' Reform ' not ' Rescind ' be the word. 
Restoring the University we should not supersede the 
Colleges ; but, on the contrary, enable the best of the Col- 
leges to do far more than they can now accomplish, and 
compel the worst to become the rivals of the best." A 
two-fold division of the subject is then made — into (a) 
Things primary or constitutive; and (b) Things secondary 
or complemental. Under (a) are included (1) The Objects 
of Instruction ; (2) The Instructors ; (3) The Instruction ; 
(4) The Excitement to study; (5) The Degree, or certificate 
of proficiency. 

Under (1) Hamilton reiterates his complaint of the 
omission of Philosophy from the curriculum. 

Under (2) there is a long discussion of the rival merits 
of Professorial and Tutorial teaching, i.e. of teaching by 
the University and teaching by the Colleges, the main 
contention being " that in so far as higher individual 
learning and ability afford a superior instruction, the 
Professorial system, if properly organised, is preferable 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 57 

to the Tutorial, even at the best." But in so far as the 
efficiency of an education depends on the greater number 
of such teachers, the Professorial is inferior to the 
Tutorial. Each has thus its separate utilities. Hamilton's 
suggested plan was " to draw the Tutors from their isola- 
tion in the private House, and to employ them in larger 
or smaller pluralities, in exercising the academical alumni 
collected into University or public classes. . . A 
plurality of Tutors can do what can be done by no 
individual Professor." The Tutors were of course to take 
the Primary Highest Honours, but their appointment 
was not to be withdrawn from the Collegial Head. " At 
the same time, in the smaller Colleges, it might be advan- 
tageous, if two at least combined, and had in common a 
single complement of Tutors." Hamilton even argued 
that one condition — a sufficiency of academically 
authorised books, gave a decided advantage to the 
Tutorial over the Professorial system of education. 

He winds up thus : " It would in my humble opinion 
be far safer to elevate the education at Oxford by Tutors, 
than, subverting that, to return to its old education by 
Professors, (still statutory though this be,) even with the 
best prospects of improvement." In a subsequently writ- 
ten Note he further upholds this proposition and expresses 
his disapproval of Mr. Bonamy Price's views as set forth 
in his pamphlet, " Suggestions for the extension of Pro- 
fessorial teaching in the University of Oxford." There 
would thus be collegio-tutorial classes for the students to 
begin with, to be followed by academico-tutorial classes 
of a more advanced character. It follows of necessity 
that the University is bound to select special books, as 
the materials of explanation by the Tutors in the Col- 
leges, and of exercise by the Tutors in the Schools. For 
this work a Board of Studies must be instituted. The 
academical courses collected and composed by such Boards 
in other Universities are " some of the most valuable con- 
tributions which have ever been made to learning and 
philosophy." 

A minor reform which Hamilton incidentally advo- 
cates was the abolition of the various grades — Nobleman, 
Fellow Commoner, etc. He would have had all students 
admitted on a footing of equality as Pensioners. 



58 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Hamilton had his own ideas about Examinations and 
Degrees. He viewed with the greatest suspicion both the 
new Triposes at Cambridge and the new Schools at 
Oxford, which he regarded as an imitation of them. His 
peculiar views on Mathematics have already been stated. 
He was equally severe on Science. " The Natural 
Sciences," he says, " are essentially easy ; requiring com- 
paratively little talent for their promotion, and only 
the most ordinary capacity for their acquisition. Their 
study, therefore, does not cultivate the mind." He would 
accordingly have given degrees of different value for 
different subjects. The highest honours he would 
have confined to two departments, Humane Letters t 
and PJiilosojjJrtj. Humane Letters " should in a great 
measure be limited to the domain of Greek and Roman 
letters." Philosophy would comprehend in its proximate 
sphere, Psychology, Logic, Morals, Politics; in a less 
proximate sphere, Grammar, Rhetoric, Poetic ; and in 
a remoter sphere, Mathematics and the Natural Sciences, 
These last, therefore, would not be rewarded with the 
highest honours. Our author's views on Examinations, 
including the comparative rating of books and the 
adding together of the marks obtained in a first and 
second part, may strike the reader as fantastic, but 
Hamilton at least saw the necessity of making Examin- 
ations systematic and scientific, and he held that the 
new Schools at Oxford were neither the one nor the 
other. In fact if they were persisted in, he threatened 
to withdraw his opinion that " Oxford was the British 
University susceptible of the easiest and most effectual 
regeneration." 

Things secondary and supplemental include (1) a 
scheme of academical Patronage and Regulation accom- 
modated to the circumstances of the English Universities, 
and (2) a scheme for the erection of new Halls. New 
Halls should be erected (a) to supply additional demand 
for entrance, (b) to prevent a slovenly tuition in the older 
Houses, (c) to keep down expense and afford a cheaper 
education to poor students, (d) to accommodate Dissenters, 
(e) to reward academical zeal and ability especially in 
their Headships. 

Other measures under this head are only named. 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 59 

They are a general taxation of the necessary collegia I 
expenses, the means of remunerating the academical 
instructors, of retaining talent in the University, of 
pensioning emeriti, libraries, musea. 

According to the Dictionary of National Biography 
Sir William Hamilton's articles in the Edinburgh Review 
had one astonishing result. They led to an attempt at 
legislation in the House of Lords. It was the Earl of 
Radnor who took action. The noble lord had already 
distinguished himself for his zeal in the cause of religious 
liberty, having in 1835 brought in a Bill to do away 
with subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles at 
the Universities. In the year 1837 he introduced the 
Bill to which the Dictionary of National Biography 
refers. It recited that the Colleges and Halls estab- 
lished at Oxford and Cambridge are possessed of great 
estates and funds, bestowed with the intention of 
providing for poor and indigent persons, of promoting 
religion and virtue, and of encouraging learning and the 
liberal arts ; that many of such Colleges and Halls were 
founded in times of remote antiquity, and nearly all 
of them before the reign of Queen Elizabeth ; and that 
the statutes prescribed by the original founders had been 
altered, and latterly many even of their more recent 
statutes had also been long and habitually disregarded 
in the ordinary administration of their affairs. The 
Bill accordingly enacted that Commissioners should 
be appointed by the King, under the Great Seal, to 
enquire into the amount, nature and application of the 
estates and funds of the said Colleges and Halls, and into 
the said statutes and the ordinary administration of the 
affairs of each College and Hall, and also how far the said 
estates and funds might be made more conducive to the 
objects intended by the founders and benefactors, and for 
which they were endowed, and to the diffusion of religion 
and virtue, and the encouragement of learning and the 
liberal arts. 

The second reading of this Bill was moved by the 
Earl of Radnor on April 11th, and it was the redoubtable 
Bishop Copleston himself who moved the customary 
amendment that it be read a second time that day six 
months. The Archbishop of Canterbury and the Duke 



60 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

of Wellington followed on the same side, while Lord 
Holland, Viscount Melbourne, and Lord Brougham 
expressed their approval of the proposed measure. The 
amendment was carried without a division, but the 
Earl of Radnor, Lords Holland, Brougham, Hatherton, 
Sommerhill and Duncannon entered a protest against 
the decision of the House. 

The noble Earl with astonishing pertinacity renewed 
his efforts on May 8th, and this time moved for the 
appointment of a Select Committee to enquire into the 
practice and statutes of the Colleges and Halls in the 
Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and to report 
whether any legislative measure was necessary to enable 
the governing bodies to make alterations and amend- 
ments. 1 Dr. Copleston again took part in the debate. 
The Duke of Wellington and the Marquis Camden, the 
Chancellors of the two Universities, having intimated 
that the greater portion of the Colleges were willing and 
desirous of entering upon a revision of their statutes 
through the instrumentality of their Visitors, the Earl of 
Radnor withdrew his motion. 

Nor had this question of University Reform gone un- 
noticed in the House of Commons. On May 4th, Mr. 
Pryme, 2 one of the members for the Borough of Cambridge, 
moved the House of Commons to address the King to 
issue a Commission to enquire into the state of the 
Universities of Oxford and Cambridge and the respective 
Colleges therein. Mr. Edward Bulwer Lytton seconded 
the motion. Mr. Spring Rice, the Chancellor of the 
Exchequer, who was the other member for the Borough 
of Cambridge, suggested that the Crown should be left to 
act on its own sense of public duty without the inter- 
position of the House, and intimated that he should move 

1 This Earl of Radnor seems to have been a remarkable man. Cooper 
(Annals, Vol. IV., p. 607, note) records that as Mr. Bickersteth, and 
one of the four Senior Fellows of Caius College, he had been a Trustee of 
the Perse foundation. About 1830 he voluntarily returned to the College 
nearly £800 which had been paid him out of the Perse fund, but to which 
he did not consider himself justly entitled. 

2 Mr. George Pryme, Professor of Political Economy in the University 
of Cambridge, was elected for the Borough of Cambridge along with Mr. 
Spring Rice in 1832, after the passage of the Reform Bill. He and his 
colleague were re-elected in 1835. 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 61 

the previous question if his colleague pressed the motion 
to a division. After an explanatory speech from Mr. 
Goulbourn, one of the members for the University of 
Cambridge, who stated that the Universities themselves 
would make such regulations as the change of circum- 
stances required, the motion was withdrawn, Mr. Pryme 
expressing a hope that Ministers would take the necessary 
steps on their own responsibility. 

Turning aside from the field of practical politics, we 
may now return to Sir "William Hamilton and endeavour 
to determine the precise value of his services to the cause 
of University Reform. His criticism of Oxford was based 
on two grounds, the one historical, and the other legal. 
How far was he right in his history and in his law ? 

As for the history let us listen to the defence 
made in reply to Hamilton by Mark Pattison, in his book, 
" Suggestions on Academical Organisation." l Pattison 
as Rector of Lincoln College, was himself one of the 
Heads of Houses whom Hamilton had so unsparingly 
attacked. He writes: — 

" Who is in fault for the renunciation by the Uni- 
versity of her high vocation (the encouragement of learn- 
ing as such), and her having taken up with the easier 
business of schoolkeeping? Not, most assuredly, the 
University itself. This opinion is almost universal ; but 
it is a historical error. It is, indeed, an error of long 
standing, but perhaps the articulate enunciation of it 
was not made before the celebrated attacks on Oxford 
in the Edinburgh Review, and particularly in an article 
" On the State of the English Universities," in June 
1831. At that time, the history, in fact, of Oxford, and 
the theory of University education, were all but unknown 
in this country. Sir W. Hamilton, with an antiquarian 
learning on the subject which is still unequalled, and 
with a firm grasp of the principles of education, came 
forward, and in his masterly essays put both the theory 
and the fact in a clear and striking light. But his 
righteous indignation at the degeneracy of his own 
University led him into one great and striking injustice. 
He argues throughout that the higher courses of the 

i pp. 127-129. 



62 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Professors were discouraged, and finally put down, by 
the Heads of Colleges, on system, from motives of self- 
interest, in order to give the monopoly to the Fellow- 
Tutor. This is certainly not the history of the sinking 
of the level of instruction in Oxford. The level of 
learning fell in the Universities because it first fell in 
the National Church. It fell in both because the 
sovereign authority used its power over both Church 
and Universities for political ends. . . There was 
an abundance of new life, and a promise of a glorious 
classical revival in Oxford, at the beginning of the 
sixteenth century, when Corpus and Cardinal (Christ 
Church) Colleges were founded as homes for the new 
studies. . . These prospects of a new life were 
crushed in the next century, not by any malfaisaflce 
within, but by the violence of the ecclesiastical revolution 
without. So far from the death of learning in Oxford 
having been occasioned by the corrupting influence of 
over-endowment, it died hard, and yielded up its breath 
not without many a struggle. The grasp of ecclesiastical 
tyranny was on its throat ; and the twenty-three years of 
Leicester's Chancellorship (1565-1588) left it pretty much 
what it remained up to the present century, without 
independence, without the dignity of knowledge, without 
intellectual ambition, the mere tool of a political party. 
. . It was the Government, and not the University 
itself, which crushed that academical freedom, without 
which learning cannot flourish. It was the Government 
which closed our gates to Nonconformists, and compelled 
us to forget our proper duty, by occupying us as a 
spiritual police to maintain an arbitrary juste milieu 
of Church government and doctrine. When Sir W. 
Hamilton pretends that it was the Board of Heads who 
in the seventeenth century silenced the Professors, he 
forgets that, long before the Laudian Statutes of 1636, 
the Professors had ceased to have a class, because there 
were no longer any students sufficiently advanced to 
attend them." ' 



1 The same question is argued from another point of view by the Rev. 
W. M. Campion in Cambridge Essays, 1858, pp. 173-175. "The Tutor" 
says the writer, "followed the text-book"; in other words it was the 
printing-press which displaced the Professors. 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 63 

The historical controversy may be summed up in the 
following passage from Prof. Goldwin Smith 1 : — 

" The Colleges in absorbing the University saddled 
it with their mediaeval statutes, with the local and family 
preferences which founders had thought themselves at 
liberty to indulge in the selection of literary almsmen, 
but which were fatal to the fair bestowal of prizes, or the 
right selection of Tutors ; with restrictions on the 
possession of property suitable only to eleemosynary 
institutions ; with the mediaeval rule of celibacy ; with 
clericism, which assumed a new significance when the 
Clergy, from being a great estate embracing all the 
intellectual callings, became at the Reformation, in the 
strict sense, a profession, animated by strong professional 
feelings, and placed in constant antagonism to Dissent ; 
with a mediaeval rule of life and a mediaeval rule of 
study, which growing obsolete, and being inevitably 
cast aside, notwithstanding the oaths taken to observe 
them, left nothing but sinecurism in their place. The 
conjoint operation of celibacy, clericism and sinecurism 
reduced the educational staff of the Colleges (which, the 
Professoriate having fallen into total decay, was also that 
of the University) to a few clergymen waiting in College 
for College livings, and filling up the interval by a 
perfunctory discharge of the duties for which they 
received Tutors' fees. All studies but those connected 
with the clerical profession, or adopted by the Clergy — 
that is to say the learned languages and divinity — fell 
into decay. The Faculties of Law and Medicine dwindled 
to shadows, the substance departing to the Inns of Court 
and the London Hospitals. Even the Faculty of Theology 
itself, the Anglican Church having developed no scientific 
theology to replace that of the Middle Ages, became 
almost a name. 

"The connection between Church and State cut us off 
from the Nonconformists, a growing element in the 
nation ; and in addition to this, clericism bound us to the 
political party to which the Clergy were allied, and which, 
at the same time, as the party opposed to change, was 
most congenial to the holders of large sinecure endow- 
ments. 

i Reorganisation, p 6. 



64 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 

"It was mainly the exclusively clerical character of 
the University that shut the door against Science. At 
Cambridge, through a combination of historical accidents, 1 
the clerical spirit was less strong, and a turn had been 
given to study, at a critical moment, by Newton." 

Hamilton, then, is admitted to be right in the main 
as to his facts, though in his explanations as to the causes 
of some of these facts, he is open to correction. His 
statement of the legal position has never been refuted. 
Dean Peacock, in his " Observations on the Statutes " 
thus describes what happened. 2 " The process of change, 
by which we have passed from the conditions of manners, 
opinions, and knowledge, which the ancient Statutes 
contemplated, to those which prevail in modern times, 
has been so gradual, as to be nearly insensible to con- 
temporary observation, and to present no point or period 
of transition sufficiently marked and considerable to call 
the attention of those who were subjected to their 
enactments very suddenly or forcibly to the great 
separation which time had effected between the written 
law and practice of the University. It will be found, 
however, that those provisions of the Statutes which 
affected the personal rights of members of the same 
society, were generally enforced by the vigilant obser- 
vation of those who had a direct or indirect interest in 
the penalties attached to their violation, whilst the most 
solemn injunctions which were addressed to their con- 
sciences merely, and not to their personal interests or 
fears, have been in many cases either entirely disregarded, 
or their observation has been disguised under some 
unmeaning form and ceremony, which satisfied the letter, 
whilst it totally violated the spirit of the law. . . 
The substantial fact remains established of the great 
separation which exists between the written and 
obligatory law and the actual practice of the University." 

Though Hamilton was right in his legal criticism, 
he made it in an exaggerated and offensive form. The 



i The story of some of these " historical accidents " has been told in 
the Introductory Chapter. Incidentally they explain why Cambridge 
has always been somewhat more liberal than Oxford. 

2 pp. 59-61, 73. 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 65 

charges of illegality, usurpation and perjury, especially 
the last, are made with wearisome reiteration. The lapse 
of time, as Peacock so clearly explains, had made much of 
the statute law obsolete both in the Universities and Col- 
leges, and therefore impossible of fulfilment, and the 
oaths so to do equally impossible. It was a wrong state 
of things and its abolition was unduly delayed, but per- 
jury is an offence against the law punishable with seven 
years penal servitude, and to lay it to the charge of men 
who had erred partly through ignorance and partly 
through indolence repels the reader. 

Sir Leslie Stephen in the Dictionary of National 
Biography, says, "Hamilton's tone in controversy was 
anything but conciliatory and certainly not free from 
pedantry, but his aim was always high, and he stirred 
some important questions." The criticism is just but the 
praise is decidedly grudging. We may set against it a 
sentence from Abbott and Campbell's Life of Jowett — 
" The first beginnings of the movement for reform 
at Oxford may be traced to Sir William Hamilton's 
articles in the Edinburgh Bevietv of 1831-1834." l 
Even in controversy Hamilton was able on occasion 
to show himself both moderate and reasonable. The 
opening paragraphs of the most important of all his 
articles, that " On the state of the English Univer- 
sities," contain these words : " We have no hesitation 
in affirming, that comparing what it actually is with 
what it possibly could be, Oxford is, of all academical 
institutions, at once the most imperfect and the most 
perfectible." Further on he writes, " That there is much 
of good, much worthy of imitation by other Universities, 
in the present spirit and the present economy of Oxford, 
we are happy to acknowledge. . . We are no enemies of 
Collegial residence, no enemies of Tutorial discipline. . . 
A Tutorial system in subordination to a Professorial 
(which Oxford formerly enjoyed) we regard as affording 
the condition of an absolutely perfect University." At the 
end of the article there are further words of conciliation. 
" The strictures, which a conviction of their truth, and 
our interest in the honour and utility of this venerable 
school, have constrained us to make on the conduct of the 

^ol. I., p. 172. 



66 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Hebdomadal Meeting, we mainly apply to the Heads of 
Houses of a former generation, and even to them solely 
in their corporate capacity. Of the late and present 
members of this body, we are happy to acknowledge, that, 
during the last twenty-five years, so great an improve- 
ment has been effected through their influence, that in 
some essential points Oxford may, not unworthily, be 
proposed as a pattern to most other Universities. But 
this improvement, though important, is partial, and can 
only receive its adequate development by a return to the 
statutory combination of the Professorial and Tutorial 
systems." 

As Hamilton grew older, his tone grew still milder. 
His Appendix on the Reform of the English Universities, 
to which the finishing touches were put in 1853, reads 
very differently from the Edinburgh Review article of 
1831. The quotations already given from it prove this to 
be the fact, and there are passages which may be cited in 
confirmation. Hamilton saw clearly that the Collegiate 
system must be maintained. " Were the institutions of 
domestic superintendence and Tutorial instruction even 
in themselves defective, I should be unwilling to super- 
sede them ; for the simple reason that they are already 
established, and consuetudinary." 1 

" We are social animals," he exclaims. " He, there- 
fore, often studies better, who does not study alone. It is 
in conforming to this requisite of our human nature, that 
those Universities which compel their alumni to live 
in common, can best vindicate the utility of academical 
Houses ; for in the community of a college life the 
social conditions of study are most fully and certainly 
supplied." 2 Hamilton's own plan of combining the 
University and the Colleges, the Professorial and the 
Tutorial systems, is only sketched in outline in the 
Appendix ; but so far as one can judge, where so much is 
left for the reader to fill in, it is extremely moderate, being 
practically the Scottish system modified by the College 
Tutors acting as Assistant Professors, with the advantage 
on the side of the older Universities because of the 
much larger number of subsidiary teachers who would be 
available. 

l Discussions, p. 759. 2 It. p. 779. 



THE SECOND ATTACK. 67 

Hamilton by means of his historical researches 
gained a clear view of Oxford University as a whole, 
and of the Collegiate system as a whole. The University 
stood before his mind as a unity which had of old 
the power of self-government and self-improvement, and 
he was convinced that to become an institution at once 
national and worthy of the nation, Oxford must again 
become such a unity. In his first article he does not 
expend himself on detailed suggestions, but deals with 
first principles and fundamental facts. In his Appendix 
he makes detailed suggestions, but his aim is always 
" to raise the University to its ancient supremacy above 
the Colleges — or rather to raise the Colleges to their 
proper level." ' 

In this grasp of general principles lies, I think, the 
secret of the influence which he has undoubtedly exer- 
cised over those who have come after him. Newman, 
Lyell, Whewell, Donaldson, Bonamy Price, Goldwin 
Smith, Mark Pattison, Lord Curzon, all quote him or 
are influenced by him. The Cambridge University Com- 
mission Report mentions him by name. The Oxford 
Report gives silent testimony to him. Page after page 
of it, as Lord Curzon points out, shows the anxiety 
of the Commissioners for the right adjustment of the 
relations between the University and the Colleges, to 
the need for which Hamilton is admittedly the first 
to have called attention. Such adjustment is a far- 
reaching principle, not a mere correction of abuses, nor an 
improvement in details. When the Universities are re- 
modelled in accordance with this principle, as assuredly 
they some day will be, Sir William Hamilton will come 
into his own, and be recognised as the Father of Univer- 
sity Reform, Sir Leslie Stephen and the Dictionary of 
National Biography notwithstanding. 

One curious fact may be called attention to in con- 
cluding this chapter. Hamilton has the following scorn- 
ful Note on p. 792 of his Appendix :—" The Rev. Mr. Sewell, 
Tutor of New College, and otherwise an able man, has of 
late gravely proposed, — to send out to the great towns of 
England tutorial missions, from the bodies thus so 

ip. 755. 



68 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

brightly illuminating Oxford ; professedly, in order, that 
any change may be averted from the system of education 
which has wrought so admirably in that University, and, 
at the same time, to communicate the benefit of such 
system to the lieges at large ! " The Rev. Mr. Sewell may 
have acted from mixed motives, but if this account is 
correct, he must be credited with having first foreseen the 
possibility of the University Extension Movement. This 
movement, which began at Cambridge, has been entered 
into with extraordinary success by the sister University. 
It is no part of this book to treat of any reform outside 
the Universities, but those who are interested in the 
subject may profitably consult what Lord Curzon says 
about it in his Principles and Methods of University 
Reform. 1 

1 See pp. 54-56. 



CHAPTER IV. 

UNIVERSITY v. COLLEGES (CAMBRIDGE). 

As Cardinal Newman furnished an introduction for 
the second chapter, so may he furnish one for our fourth. 
In his " Rise and Progress of Universities," ] which forms 
the first part of his third volume of "Historical Sketches," 
near the beginning of the XVth Chapter, he again refers 
to the controversy begun by the Edinburgh Review as 
" the dispute which has been carried on at intervals in 
the British Universities for the last fifty years." He con- 
tinues, " It began in the pages of the Edinburgh Review, 
which at that time might in some sense be called the 
organ of the University of Edinburgh. Twenty years 
later, if my memory does not play me false, it was 
renewed in the same quarter ; then it was taken up at 
Cambridge, and lately it was going on briskly between 
some of the most able members of the University of 
Oxford. Now what has been the point of dispute between 
the combatants'? This, — whether a University should be 
conducted on the system of Professors, or on the system 
of Colleges and College Tutors. . . The party of the 
North and of progress have ever advocated the Profes- 
sorial system, as it has been called, and have pointed in 
their own behalf to the practice of the middle ages and of 
modern Germany and France; the party of the South and 
of prescription have ever stood up for the Tutorial or 
Collegiate system, and have pointed to Protestant Oxford 
and Cambridge, where it has almost or altogether super- 
seded the Professorial." Two remarks may be made on 
this extract. The first is that the controversy here 
referred to was not at bottom a difference of opinion 
about two rival methods of teaching ; what was really in 
the minds of the disputants was whether the University 
should be restored to its old supremacy, or whether the 

i This consists of a series of articles contributed to the Catholic 
University Gazette in 1854, and then published in 1856 under the title of 
Office and Work of Universities. In 1872 it was republished under the title 
given in the text. 



70 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Colleges should retain the domination which they had in 
fact, if not in name, won over the University. When 
Newman heads his XVth Lecture, " Professors and 
Tutors," the title is really equivalent to that of " Univer- 
sity v. Colleges," which is prefixed to the present chapter. 
The second remark is that Sir William Hamilton, though 
he was the foremost fighter for the ancient status of the 
University, as has been made abundantly clear, yet 
insisted that the Collegiate system must be retained, the 
worst Colleges being brought up, if possible, to the level 
of the best. 

The dispute, says Newman, was taken up at Cam- 
bridge. The way in which this took place was roundabout 
and curious. In 1845 Sir Charles Lyell (at that time 
plain Mr. Lyell) published a book entitled "Travels in 
North America." It consisted almost entirely of geological 
observations on that country, but in chapter xiii. the 
author describes how he went to the Annual Meeting of 
American Geologists at Boston. During his stay in that 
city he was bombarded with questions as to the constitu- 
tion of the English Universities. These questions he 
found it very difficult to answer. " The more," he says, 
" I endeavoured to explain the present state of our 
academical course of study, and the peculiar organisation 
of the corps of teachers to whom its superintendence is 
confided, the more strange it appeared to my New Eng- 
land friends ; and I myself became the more aware of its 
distinctive and anomalous character, when contrasted 
with the methods followed elsewhere." He continues, 
"Many who have been educated, like myself, at Oxford, 
are ignorant of the system of education formerly acted 
upon in our English Universities, and of the real nature 
and causes of the present state of things. I shall, there- 
fore, attempt to give, in the remainder of this chapter, a 
brief account of the leading peculiarities of our former 
and present academical machinery, and to point out its 
inevitable consequence, the very limited range of studies 
which can be pursued, so long as things remain unal- 
tered." l Lyell gives the following description of the 
College system : " In the first place, then, the mass of 



i Travels in North America, Vol. I., p. 271. 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 71 

students or undergraduates at Oxford is divided into 
twenty-four separate communities or Colleges, very 
unequal in numbers, the residents in each varying from 
10 in the smaller to about 140 in the larger Colleges, and 
the whole business of educating these separate sections 
of the youth is restricted to the Tutors of the separate 
Colleges. Consequently, two or three individuals, and 
occasionally a single instructor, may be called upon to 
give lectures in all the departments of human knowledge 
embraced in the academical course of four years. If the 
College be small, there is only occupation and salary 
sufficient to support one Tutor; any attempt, therefore, 
to sub-divide the different branches of learning and 
sciences among distinct teachers is abandoned. . . In 
a few of the larger Colleges, indeed, some rude approach 
to such a partition is made, so far as to sever the mathe- 
matical from the classical studies; but even then the 
Tutors in each division are often called upon, in the 
public examinations, to play their part in both depart- 
ments. Thus, a single instructor gives lectures or 
examines in the writings of the Greek and Roman 
historians, philosophers, and poets, together with logic, 
the elements of mathematics and theology. . . In the 
next place, I may state, that the choice of teachers is by 
no means left open to free competition, like the Professor- 
ships in most ancient and modern Universities. The 
College Tutors are selected from graduates who are on the 
foundation of their respective Colleges, and who may have 
obtained their appointment originally, some because they 
happened to be the founder's kin, or were educated at a 
particular school, others because they were born in a 
particular town, county or diocese ; a few only being 
selected for merit, or as having distinguished themselves 
in examinations open to all candidates. Most of these 
teachers forfeit their Fellowship, and most probably with 
it their office of Tutor, if they should marry, or if, after a 
certain number of years, they do not embrace the clerical 
profession. They also look to preferment in the Church 
from their position in their College, so that they have 
every inducement to regard the business of teaching as a 
temporary calling. Their office as instructors is, in short, 
a mere stepping-stone to something else ; and they hope 



72 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

to gain their reward, not when they are superannuated, 
but when they are still in the prime of life. In fact, their 
promotion is so contrived as at once to cut short the 
career of usefulness in which they may have hitherto 
distinguished themselves." ' 

Lyell then goes into a disquisition as to the origin of 
these evils. In this he follows Sir William Hamilton (to 
whose article of June 1831 he refers in a footnote on 
p. 278), but he gives his own account of the struggle 
over the Examination Statute at Oxford in 1800 (in which 
he naturally objects to the exclusion of the Natural 
Sciences) and the events which followed after. He refers 
to Dr. Peacock's book on the Statutes of the University 
of Cambridge (p. 156) for an account of similar develop- 
ments at Cambridge. Lyell is especially interesting in 
what he says about the events of the year 1839. " In the 
year 1839," he writes, " a last and most vigorous attempt 
was made at Oxford to restore the functions of the 
professorial body, which had now become contracted 
within the narrowest limits. 2 The Professors of Experi- 
mental Philosophy, Comparative Anatomy, Chemistry, 
Mineralogy, Geology, Botany, Geometry and Astronomy, 
sent in a representation to the Heads of Houses, in which 
they declared their inability to discharge the duties which 
they had undertaken, notwithstanding their unabated 
zeal and devotion. They accompanied their petition with 
a printed statistical table, showing how the number of 
their classes had fallen off. It appeared that the Anatomy 
class had dwindled between the years 1819 and 1838 to less 
than half, and that of Astronomy to one-fifth of its original 
numbers. The same had happened to the class of 
Chemistry, many others having declined in like ratio. A 
majority of the Heads of Houses were favourable to a 
reform, and consequently proposed a new examination 

i lb. pp. 272-274. 

2 A similar attempt was made at Cambridge in 1843, when a Syndicate 
was appointed " to consider whether it is desirable to take any measures, 
and if so what, to secure a correspondence between the Mathematical 
and Classical Examinations of the University, and the Mathematical and 
Classical Lectures of the University Professors." The Syndicate having 
made a report, a Grace to carry its recommendations into effect was 
proposed on March 31st and rejected in the Non-Regent House by 27 
non-placets to 14 placets. (Cooper, Annals, IV., pp. 659-660.) 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 73 

statute, in which there was a provision requiring attend- 
ance on at least two series of professorial lectures, as a 
preliminary qualification for the Bachelor of Arts' Degree. 
. . . But it was now too late — reform was beyond the 
power of the Hebdomadal Board. Several academical 
generations had grown up under the new order of things. 1 
The Collegiate and private Tutors were interested in 
opposing the new provisions, and they were accordingly 
rejected in Convocation. Yet while they threw out that 
part of the proposed Statute which would have gone far 
towards reviving the Professorial Chairs, they passed 
another part requiring the Professors of Astronomy, 
Experimental Philosophy, Chemistry, Geology, Minera- 
logy, Anatomy, Botany, Medicine, Civil Law, English 
Law, Greek, Arabic, Sanscrit, Anglo - Saxon, Poetry, 
Modern History, and Political Economy, to deliver regular 
courses of lectures. They were, in fact, bound not only 
by ancient statutes to require the teachers above enumer- 
ated faithfully to discharge their duty, but since the 
Examination Statute of 1800, they had sanctioned the 
foundation of new Chairs, such as Experimental Philosophy, 
Mineralogy, Geology, Political Economy, and Sanscrit, and 
had accepted annual grants from the Crown to endow 
certain Readerships. In homage, therefore, to the moral 
obligations they had incurred not to render these new and 
old foundations nugatory, they continued to exact an 
outward conformity to the Statutes, by enforcing the 
delivery of lectures, the efficiency of which they allowed 
other parts of their system to defeat. Their conduct 
reminds us of the orders issued by Charles the Fifth to 
offer up prayers throughout Spain for the deliverance 
of the Pope while he suffered his army to retain him 
prisoner in the Castle of St. Angelo." 2 

The results of this policy are thus depicted. "After the 
year 1839, we may consider three-fourths of the Sciences, 
still nominally taught at Oxford, to have been virtually 
exiled from the University. The class-rooms of the 

i i-e . that which resulted from the passing of the first Examination 
Statute in 1810. There were no examinations and no resulting degrees in 
Science, and therefore the undergraduates would not attend lectures which 
from the standpoint of a degree were of no use to them. No Fellowships 
either were awarded for Science at this time. 

2 Travels in North America, pp. 291-294. 



74 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Professors were some of them entirely, others nearly, 
deserted. Chemistry and Botany attracted between the 
years 1840 and 1844, from three to seven students; 
Geometry, Astronomy and Experimental Philosophy 
scarcely more ; Mineralogy and Geology, still taught by 
the same Professor, who, fifteen years before, had 
attracted crowded audiences, from ten to twelve ; Political 
Economy still fewer ; even Ancient History and Poetry 
scarcely commanded an audience ; and strange to say, in 
a country with whose destinies those of India are so 
closely bound up, the first of Asiatic scholars gave lectures 
to one or two pupils, and these might have been absent, 
had not the cherished hope of a Boden scholarship 
induced them to attend." ' 

Sir Charles Lyell, having drawn this graphic picture 
of his own University, next turns to Cambridge. " At 
Cambridge," he writes,' 2 " the Collegiate influence has, 
since the Reformation, caused the University to pass 
gradually through nearly all the same phases as at 
Oxford. . . Very recently at Cambridge, all branches of 
knowledge taught by the Professors— in a word, every 
subject except what is understood in our Universities by 
Classics and Mathematics — have had sentence of banish- 
ment passed upon them in the form of new compulsory 
examinations, under the management of College Tutors, 
the Oxford plan of awarding honours in classical and 
mathematical attainments alone being adhered to. The 
Professors of Chemistry and Anatomy, who had formerly 
considerable classes, have only mustered six or seven 
pupils, although still compelled to give courses of fifty 
lectures each. The Chairs of Modern History, and of the 
application of Machinery to the Arts, once numbering 
audiences of several hundreds, have been in like manner 
deserted. Yet dispensations are rarely granted for the 
discontinuance of useless duties, even when only two 
pupils present themselves. 

" Moreover, here, as at Oxford, it is not uncommon to 
give such Chairs as Mathematics, Natural Philosophy, 
Chemistry, Botany, Astronomy, Geology, Mineralogy and 
others to clergymen, who combine them with clerical 

l lb. pp. 298-9. 2 lb. p. 38. 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 75 

duties, or throw theni up when they obtain preferment, 
and who, however eminent, owing, as they must do, a 
mixed allegiance, partly to their ecclesiastical order, and 
partly to the professorial body, cannot stand up with 
heart and courage in defence of the public, as opposed to 
the clerical and collegiate, interests.' . . The panegyrists, 
indeed, of the modern University system in England, seem 
never to admit candidly this plain truth, that the Colleges 
have no alternative in regard to the course of study open 
to them. Take any flourishing University in Great 
Britain or on the Continent, where a wide range of 
studies are taught. Let the students be divided into 
fifteen or more sections, without any classification in 
reference to their age, acquirements, talents, tastes, or 
future prospects. Assign to each section a separate set 
of teachers, chiefly clerical, and looking forward to pre- 
ferment in the Church and public schools, and from these 
select all your public examiners. What must be the 
result ? The immediate abandonment of three-fourths of 
the sciences now taught, while those retained will belong 
of necessity to the less progressive branches of human 
knowledge." 2 

As for a remedy Lyell says, " Appeal under such cir- 
cumstances must therefore be made to an external 
authority. A Royal Commission like those which have 
more than once visited of late years the Universities of 
Scotland, might prove a sufficient counterpoise to the 
power and vis inertiae of forty learned Corporations." 3 

Lyell also took occasion to criticise Whewell for his 
views on the proper subjects of College and professorial 
teaching. Whewell had written, "The subjects suitable 
for University teaching are the undoubted truths of 
mathematics, and works of unquestioned excellence, such 
as the best classical authors. When engaged in these, the 
student respects his instructor; they are the fit subjects 
of College lectures. A spirit of criticism is awakened by 
the study of philosophy, which is a fit subject of profess- 
orial lectures." 4 Whewell had also written, 5 " Professorial 
lectures- are especially suited to those which we have called 

l lb. pp. 302-3. 2 lb. pp. 307-8. 3 lb. p. 311. 

4 University Education, pp. 46-53. 5 Liberal Education, p. 112. 



76 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Progressive studies. . . But with regard to Permanent 
studies, the impression which, in a Liberal Education, 
they ought to produce upon the mind, is eminently pro- 
moted by College Lectures such as we have described ; 
and can, by no means, be derived from Professorial Lec- 
tures alone." Progressive and Permanent studies had 
been defined by W he well at p. 5 of the same work. Perma- 
nent studies were " those portions of knowledge which 
have long taken their permanent shape ; ancient languages 
with their literature and long-established demonstrated 
sciences," — i.e. Classics and Mathematics. To the Pro- 
gressive Studies " belong the results of the mental 
activity of our own times ; the literature of our own age, 
and the sciences in which men are making progress from 
day to day," — i.e. Philosophy and Natural Science. These 
two systems of education may "with nearly equal pro- 
priety" be treated " as practical and speculative teaching; 
or on the one hand mathematics combined with classics ; 
and on the other philosophy ; — or College lectures, and 
professorial lectures ; — and we may look upon them as 
exemplifying a respectful and a critical spirit." 1 

Whewell flings aside Lyell's historical criticisms with 
something like contempt. He writes, 2 " Mr. Lyell seems 
to make it one of his objections to the existing system of 
the English Universities that it is of modern origin. He 
appears to hold, with a writer in the Edinburgh Revieiv, 
that the ancient system of the Universities was one in 
which Professorial Lectures were the main instrument of 
teaching. . . But I suppose Mr. Lyell would not him- 
self attach much weight to this argument of his, from the 
asserted practice of a remote antiquity. The College 
system has, as he allows, prevailed in the English Univer- 
sities from the time of the Reformation, which is surely 
antiquity enough, if antiquity is to guide us. The 
defenders of the College system have never, so far as I am 
aware, rested its defence mainly upon its remote anti- 
quity. They have spoken of its advantages. . . If we 
can secure these advantages, we shall not readily consent 
to part with them in order to go back to the condition 
which he represents as existing before the Reformation. 

i University Education, pp. 52-53. 2 Liberal Education, pp. 127-131. 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 77 

A return to an obsolete state of things on the ground of 
antiquity is generally a mischievous innovation." Whewell 
does indeed make an admission about private tuition. 
" I have no wish," he writes, " to deny either the existence, 
or the importance of this evil. . . But I see no reason 
whatever to believe that Mr. Lyell's remedies would avail 
us." 

Whewell was also altogether opposed to the appoint- 
ment of a Royal Commission as suggested by Lyell. " Such 
an interference from without, with the legislation of the 
Universities, would, I am fully persuaded, be productive 
of immense harm. It might destroy all the advantages of 
the existing system ; but that anything so thrust into the 
structure of these ancient institutions would assimilate 
with their organisation, or work to any good purpose, I 
see no reason to hope. Such a measure could hardly be 
attempted without producing a sentiment of wrong in the 
majority of the existing members of the University, which 
would deprive the new scheme of all co-operation on their 
part." 1 Whewell believed in "reform from within," but 
in five years from the publication of the above remarks 
the dreaded Royal Commission was appointed. 

An echo of this controversy between University and 
Colleges, Professors and Tutors, is to be found in a Cam- 
bridge pamphlet entitled " The Next Step." 2 At p. 40 the 
writer says, " One great difficulty in this question (an 
improved system of Examinations) is that of reconciling 
the College and University systems, or of forming a 
general system, where much must be left to the Colleges 
singly, and cannot be brought under one management. 
If we legislate too minutely, we run the risk of putting 
the University in the place of the Colleges, an alteration, 
which, even if desirable, would stand no chance of being 
carried. Our object must be to procure a comprehensive 
system, which shall secure as much as possible uniformity 
in its working without meddling too much with details. 
To carry out any such plan to the full extent, a cordial 
co-operation of the Colleges with the University is 
necessary, but it is greatly to be feared that such a co- 
operation is far from likely." 

i lb. p. 127. 2 Attributed by Mr. J. W. Clark to A. R. Grant. 



78 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Another echo may be found in a pamphlet, " Observa- 
tions on the Cambridge system," by A. H. Wratislaw. 1 
"In the first place," writes Mr. Wratislaw, "the College 
system is most singularly adapted for getting rid of the 
best men at the very age when they begin to be most 
useful. Extreme youth is the peculiar characteristic of 
the College Lecturer. And most of such Lecturers, when 
possessed of ability, soon betake themselves to situations 
where they are better paid and can look to obtaining a 
permanent settlement. In the large Colleges it is true 
there is pecuniary inducement, in the one case for three, 
in the other for two Tutors to remain for a considerable 
period : and perhaps most of the small Colleges can offer 
a tolerable pecuniary recompense to a single Tutor. But 
the Tutors of small Colleges, if there be more than one, 
and the Lecturers of all Colleges, both large and small, 
have no inducement whatever to continue their exertions, 
beyond the mere fact of not having yet provided them- 
selves with satisfactory permanent situations in other 
quarters. Thus the Public Schools and other institutions 
have the pick of our best men. . . It is futile to talk of 
Professorial Education entering into the Cambridge 
system, when almost every subject of Professorial 
Lectures is unanimously ignored by the Colleges, and it 
is mere waste of time for a student wishing to obtain a 
Fellowship to pay the slightest attention to them. Nay, 
if all the Professors were swept away to-morrow, their 
absence (except so far as the personal influence of 
individuals is concerned) would be scarcely perceptible in 
the University. Where any symptom of the Professorial 
system is found, every development of the principle of 
competition, so unsparingly applied to the students, is 
sedulously suppressed and exterminated. With almost 
the only exception of the quasi-professorial Lectures 
delivered at Trinity on Plato and Aristotle to the second 
and third years, I have no hesitation in asserting the 
average run of College Lectures to be rarely above and 
generally far below, the level of the lessons of the head 
class in a well-conducted Public School, depressed as 
such Lectures necessarily are, owing to the mixed classes 

i Published in 1848 partly in reply to, and partly suggested by 
Wbewell's Liberal Education. 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 79 

of ignoramuses and proficients lectured together under 
the College system. . . The fact is that our Pro- 
fessorial Staff is a mere hodge-podge of independent and 
sometimes capricious foundations, and has really no 
claim whatever upon the position it ought to assume, I 
mean that of a body directing and superintending the 
higher education and studies of the University. These 
are evils which the University cannot remedy by any 
revision or reformation of her Statutes. She has no 
control whatever over the individual Colleges. If any 
College were to stop lectures entirely to-morrow, close its 
Chapel, or perform any other antic, the University would 
have no power of interfering. These evils arise from the 
relations between the Colleges and the University, and 
can be remedied only by the compulsory application of a 
portion of the revenues of the separate Colleges, at present 
ivasted upon non-residents, to the higher purposes of the 
University. They can therefore only be remedied by the 
State and the two Houses of Parliament. Under these 
circumstances, and until such State interference takes 
place, it only remains for every individual engaged in the 
Public Tuition of the Colleges to do his utmost to 
alleviate the evils, which he may lament, but cannot 
cure." 

The same writer returned to the subject in 1850. In 
a pamphlet, " Observations on the Cambridge System," 
he says (p. 8), " The College system is utterly insufficient 
for the higher parts of Education in every branch of learn- 
ing. . . I dare almost assert that the University would 
gladly reform itself, but is enslaved and imprisoned by 
the Colleges, which at once monopolise and oppress her. 
It is perhaps not generally known that no College con- 
tributes a single farthing towards the Education of the 
students, the Fellowships being either absolutely or 
practically pure sinecures, and the Tutors and Lecturers 
deriving their whole revenues, as such, from the pockets 
of the undergraduates. . . Is there no call for reform 
here ? Is there no necessity for State interference to 
secure a fitting portion of the College revenues to their 
use as Educational Establishments, or to that of the 
University ? . Nor is it generally known that 

while the Colleges are keeping the University in their 



80 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 

hands, or rather in their fetters, they do not contribute 
a single farthing towards its expenses ; that while they 
are sending thousands of pounds annually to non- 
residents, who are doing nothing for their money, the 
University is penniless and almost bankrupt. 
There is no necessity in the nature of things for the 
continuance of the present system, which the Dean of 
Ely 1 has shewn to have been forcibly instituted by the 
Elizabethan Statutes, and to have caused a complete 
revolution in the constitution of the University. The 
Colleges were never intended to monopolise the Uni- 
versity. . . What, then, is it that we want in the 
University ? In the first place, freedom ; freedom from 
the narrow thraldom of the College system. In the 
second place, the application of the College revenues to 
their original purposes, though not perhaps always in 
the manner and form originally devised by the Founders. 
And in the third place, inducements to the learned and 
scientific to remain and reside and pursue their studies 
amongst us. 2 . . There is a Syndicate sitting for the 
revision of the Statutes of the University. Its grand 
difficulty is the relation between the University and the 
Colleges. Everybody knows how rarely and how un- 
willingly a Corporation reforms itself ; but here we have 
Corporations within a Corporation, the lesser Corporations 
individually irresponsible to, and collectively monopolis- 
ing the larger one. Over the Colleges the University 
is powerless : what can we expect here except from State 
interference to facilitate the progress of reform? 3 . . . 
The fact is, that the College system is not capable of 
further extension, and if other branches of learning 
besides Latin, Greek and Mathematics are to be pursued 
here, extensive organic changes must open the way for 
an extended University system, of which the Colleges in 
their several spheres may form a most useful and bene- 
ficial portion. 4 . . Surely far more individuals than 
at present might enjoy the advantages of society and 
education at the Universities. But that they do not 
is entirely owing to the expensive, unpractical and 
narrow nature of the corrupt and exclusive College 
system." 5 

i Dr. Peacock. 2 pp. 9-10. 3 p. 13. 4 p. 15. 5 p. 17. 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 81 

Finally Dr. Donaldson's contribution to the subject 
may be noted. It is contained in the first part of his 
" Classical Scholarship and Classical Learning," which 
was published in 1856, after the Royal Commission had 
reported but before Parliament had actually legislated. 
Into the historical survey therein contained it is not 
necessary to enter. The author comes to the point now 
under discussion at p. 32. " The fact that the system 
of education is too narrow both at Oxford and Cambridge 
. . . is alleged by all who have written on the subject 
of University reform, and is known to be slightly, if at 
all, qualified by the institution of new triposes. 1 And the 
cause is as confidently and unanimously alleged to be the 
College system, or immediately, that substitution of com- 
petitive tests for University teaching which is referred to 
the influence of the Colleges. The case as far as Oxford 
is concerned, has been stated repeatedly and with great 
ability by Sir William Hamilton." He then quotes Mr. 
Wratislaw's pamphlet, " Observations on the Cambridge 
System," and also the author of the " Next Step," with 
regard to his own University. 

He continues 2 : " For my own part, I am bound to 
express my conviction that, so far as education is cramped 
and narrowed and degraded at Cambridge in particular, 
the cause is to be sought in the subordination of the 
University to the Colleges, and in the admission to the 
latter of a great number of students who are not duly 
qualified for University teaching, and that the first and 
main remedy would be a genuine University matricula- 
tion. At the same time, I think that the case with 
regard to the Colleges has not always been fully under- 
stood and fairly represented, and that the important 
functions, which they will perform even when the 
University is restored to its proper independence and 
authority, are not duly appreciated, but frequently under- 
valued." 

Dr. Donaldson then gives his own historical review, 
and after praising the Colleges, especially Trinity and 
St. John's, for the way in which they discharge their duties, 

i The Moral Sciences Tripos, and the Natural Sciences Tripos, the 
first lists of which appeared in 1851. 

2 p. 35. g 



82 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

elaborates his position thus ! : — " But the very fact 
that the best Colleges are the largest, and the smallest 
generally the worst, seems to furnish an argument in 
favour of the opinion, that the desired object would be 
obtained, if the University were, what its name denotes 
and what it once was, one community and not a number 
of different communities. At any rate, there is no doubt 
in the minds of those who have studied the subject, that, 
in spite of their various merits and the importance of their 
endowments, the Colleges interpose the greatest obstacles 
to the free play of our academical agency. While they 
do not spend any part of their revenues on the education 
of the undergraduates, they oblige all undergraduates to 
pay for such education as they furnish by becoming 
members of some College, and, by virtue of the revolution 
forced upon the University by the Elizabethan Statutes, 
usurp the rights belonging to the University as such. . . 
But it is not only by obliging all members of the Univer- 
sity to be members of Colleges also, and then compelling 
them to attend and pay for a sort of school-boy lessons, 
that the College system cramps and trammels the Univer- 
sity teaching. The Colleges are also responsible for the 
admission and matriculation of a very large proportion of 
members quite disqualified by their existing knowledge 
from any intelligent participation in a course of genuine 
academic teaching. That this should be a natural result 
of the limitation of the University to the Colleges and 
their members must appear to any one who reflects. The 
Colleges are really a collection of rival boarding schools. 
The interest and credit of each of them make it desirable 
that they should have the largest possible number of 
entries. Can it be surprising then that they should be 
unwilling to reject any candidate for admission, who 
comes to them with a plausible recommendation ? " 

Opportunity will be taken hereafter to show what 
measure of truth there still is in these accusations. 

U6. p. 41. 



CHAPTER V 

UNIVERSITY v. COLLEGES (OXFORD). 

At Oxford the discussion of the above topic showed a 
tendency to wander into a by-path, and to become a con- 
troversy between the Professorial lecture and the Tutorial 
or catechetical class, the living voice and the printed 
book. This result was probably due to the impulse which 
Copleston gave it in the first instance. After the descrip- 
tion of the Examinations quoted above in Chapter II., 
he continues as follows 1 : — 

" It will be evident, from the statement here given, 
that the students are prepared to pass this examination, 
not by solemn public lectures, delivered to a numerous 
class from a Professor's chair, but by private study in 
their respective Colleges. This method of study is the 
next thing which requires to be explained ; for upon this 
point also the world are greatly, and in some instances 
purposely, misinformed. 

" The mode of instruction by College Lectures, which 
prevails at both the English Universities, is an innova- 
tion on the original plan, which formerly obtained among 
them, and which is still practised in foreign Universities, 
and I believe in those of Scotland. Some peculiar advan- 
tages there are attending each method, and the best 
method perhaps would be that which should unite both 
more completely than is the case with any modern 
University. If, however, they are compared one against 
the other, as means of instruction, the preference seems 
strongly due to that of College Lectures. 

" Under this system the pupils of one Tutor are easily 
classed according to their capacities, and the stock of 
learning and science they bring with them. When formed 
into these sub-divisions, the choice of the lecture may be 
adapted to their peculiar wants, and the lecturer can 
perceive, individually as he goes along, how his instruc- 
tion is received. The heaviness of solitary reading is 

l Reply, pp. 145, 146. 



84 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

relieved by the number which compose a class : this 
number varies from three or four to ten or twelve : a sort 
of emulation is awakened in the pupil, and a degree of 
animation in the instructor, which cannot take place 
with a single pupil, and which approaches to the vivacity 
of a public speaker addressing an audience. At the same 
time he can address himself to individuals, satisfy their 
scruples, correct their errors, and in so doing, the subject 
being thoroughly sifted and handled is seen in a variety 
of lights, aud fastens more durably on the mind of those 
who are listeners merely. Indeed, the impression thus 
made by theorems of science, and by processes of reason- 
ing on every subject, is so much more vivid, and the 
means are at hand of ascertaining so satisfactorily how 
each pupil receives what he hears, that the business of 
teaching is made less irksome and fatiguing to both 
parties ; and in a few weeks the Tutor is enabled to form 
a juster estimate of the abilities, and quickness, and 
mental habits of his pupil, than any other system could 
explain to him in as many years." 

Hamilton naturally took the opposite view to 
Copleston, whom he disliked and whose name he never 
succeeded in spelling correctly. In his article " On the 
Patronage and Superintendence of Universities " l he lays 
it down that " Universities are establishments founded 
and privileged by the State for public purposes: they 
accomplish these purposes through their Professors. 2 In 
a note on the same page he adds, " Oxford and Cambridge 
are no exceptions. Inasmuch as they now accomplish 
nothing through their Professors, they are no longer 
Universities ; and this even by their own Statutes." 

As we have seen, Hamilton modified his views in later 
years, and in his Appendix he uses his milder tone. He 
there writes,' " There are two kinds of Instructors . . . 
Professors and Tutors. . . Tutors are now, de facto y 
at least, the only necessary instructors in Oxford and 
Cambridge ; Professors alone are known in the other 
British, as in all foreign, Universities. Instruction by 
Tutors, and instruction by Professors, have, severally, 
peculiar advantages." 

i Edinburgh Review, Vol. LIX., No. cxix., pp. 196-227 (April, 1834). 
2 Discussions, p. 363. s pp. 802-812. 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 85 

The Oxford controversy alluded to by Newman arose 
out of the evidence given before the Royal Commission of 
1850 by Professor H. Halford Vaughan. Dr. Pusey, who 
had himself refused to give evidence before the Commis- 
sioners, regarding them as an unlawful body, attacked 
Vaughan for the views he had expressed. The Professor, 
in his pamphlet entitled Oxford Reform and Oxford Pro- 
fessors, 1 summarising this attack, declared that Pusey 
had maintained that the endowment of Professors and 
their erection into importance was unadvisable for five 
reasons, because 

First, Professorial lectures do not communicate 
knowledge well ; 

Secondly, Professorial lectures do not give a discip- 
line to the faculties ; and so on. 
Pusey replied in a lengthy pamphlet entitled Collegiate 
and Professorial Teaching and Discipline, in which he 
argued, on Copleston's lines, for the superiority of 
catechetical class teaching over Professorial discourses. 
He also defended the College system chiefly from Conti- 
nental examples. It is easy to understand why the 
dispute took this turn. If College teaching methods 
could be shown to be better than Professorial teaching 
methods, the College system as a whole clearly showed to 
advantage in this particular respect when contrasted with 
the University system, and its upholders felt that they 
had scored a point. 2 Pusey had also a theological reason 
for the attitude he took up. The German system was 
Professorial, and from Germany came Rationalism and 
heterodox views about the Bible. Pusey feared for the 
faith if the Professorial system was again exalted to 
power at Oxford, but this second by-path would lead us 
still further away from the main course of the history of 
University reform. 

A contribution of more enduring value, going back to 
the broader lines, was made at Oxford by Professor 
Bonamy Price. In this case we have the advantage of 

i Vaughan has a very eloquent passage on the advantages of oral 
teaching, which is quoted by Newman (Historical Sketches, Vol. III., 
pp. 186-187), with a characteristic comment, and also by Donaldson 
(Classical Studies, pp. 62-63). 

2 A Cambridge contribution to this side issue may be found in Campion, 
Cambridge Essays, 1858, pp. 169-173, and 175-176. 



86 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

comparing the views of the writer in 1850, when he had no 
thought of ever rising to University distinction, with his 
views in 1875, when he was seated in the Professorial chair. 

The first expression of these views is in a pamphlet 
published in 1850, entitled Suggestions for the Extension 
of Professorial Teaching in the University of Oxford. 1 
After enumerating the various causes which lead men to 
desire University Reform, such as the infusion of a larger 
amount of science and literature into the curriculum, 
the waste of splendid endowments, the heavy expense of a 
University education, or the defective systems of Univer- 
sity and College government, the writer comes to the 
conclusion that " The practical conversion of the Univer- 
sities into Public Schools, involving as it does such 
serious consequences to the pupils, the teachers and the 
country at large, is, I conceive, the strongest reason 
which calls for University Reform." 

The functions of the Universities are double — to pro- 
mote learning, and to educate the young. The latter 
office is in many respects admirably discharged. Its 
efficiency dates from this century (1800.) But this very 
efficiency has caused the other duty, that of advancing 
learning, to be neglected. The Colleges vie with one 
another in their efforts to secure the greatest number of 
First-Class men or high Wranglers. Hence an evil of 
immense magnitude — the excess of educational labour 
imposed on the Tutors. An active Tutor has no leisure 
for reading and self-improvement. Nor would it be any 
advantage to him if he had. If he acquired new stores of 
learning, his pupils would reject them because they would 
not find them of any use in the Schools, i.e. for examina- 
tion purposes. 

One obvious method of alleviating this evil would be 
to give a wider range to the Examinations. But this 
would be impossible with the existing College system. 
So many separate bodies could not be induced to act 
together, and a single College would be powerless. The 
existing system is bad for the Tutors, because they know 
the road to literary or scientific distinction is barred by 
it. The nation is also the poorer through it. Thus the 

i It was just after the announcement of the Royal Commission had 
been made. 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 87 

best men leave the Universities for a career elsewhere. 
" The evil has gone on increasing of late years. The 
complaint is very general at both Universities that the 
Tutors are much younger men than they were formerly ; 
and that literary eminence is becoming rarer among 
them. 

" It will be said, perhaps, that the Tutors are not 
the whole University; that there are Heads of Houses, 
Professors, and other residents from whom great eminence 
may be expected. . . The various modes of electing 
Heads furnish no guarantee for profound learning. 
They are engaged with the discipline and government of 
the University ; they take no part in the business of 
education." As for the Professors, " it is remarkable that 
no class of residents at Oxford has demanded University 
Reform with so much earnestness. They have proclaimed 
the fact that they are outside the system and practical 
working of the University. They point to their empty or 
their dilettanti classes. . . With very few exceptions 
young men do not come to them to learn in earnest the 
Sciences which they teach ; were they removed, save one 
or two, their loss would be felt only in the social inter- 
course of Oxford ; . . they are not incorporated into 
the one single business of Oxford, the preparation for the 
degree. The loss thus inflicted on the nation is great 
and serious. 

" Many persons, however, maintain that the two 
offices of education and of rearing learned men cannot be 
carried on together at Oxford, 1 and that the work of 
education is so valuable as not to allow of any rivalry on 
the part of the other. But if one of these two duties must 
be abandoned, it behoves those who protest against any 
alteration of College studies to consider whether the 
renunciation of learning is consistent with the oaths 
and obligations of Fellows. The endowments of the 
Fellowships were not founded to help a young barrister 
in London, or to eke out the scanty incomes of country 
curates, or to enable unbeneficed clergymen to wait for a 
College living, or even to provide schoolmaster-tutors to 
educate the young men of the land. They were destined 

i Newman was of this opinion. See his Idea of a University, pp. 
13-14. 



88 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

for the maintenance of students. So certainly was this 
the design of Collegiate foundations, that there is no 
obligation lying on Colleges to take in members not 
attached to foundations. It rests entirely with the 
Heads of Houses to shut or open their gates against the 
admission of independent members ; and if they refused 
to license the opening of Halls, the work of education 
would be completely arrested for all except a few under- 
graduate Fellows. No plainer proof can be needed to 
show that the educating of young men for the various 
professions of life is not the fulfilling of the duties laid by 
founders on the Colleges they created. . . But there 
need not be any collision of duties. Both may be fulfilled 
in harmonious working." 

Mr. Price's proposals were : — 

I. That the first examination be placed at Matricu- 
lation, and be required from all candidates for admission 
at all Colleges alike. 

II. The examination for the B.A. Degree to be 
divided into two parts. The first part to take place after 
two years residence. The remaining part to take place at 
the end of the undergraduate course. 

III. That every undergraduate be placed under the 
instruction of Tutors for two years only in order to be 
prepared for the first part of the B.A. examination. 

IV. That the present fee for tuition, now charged for 
four years, be paid to the Tutor for two years only ; and 
that the fee for the remaining two years be transferred 
in one payment, to the public Professors. 

V. That there be three public Professors appointed 
in each of the departments of Divinity, History, and 
Philosophy; that every undergraduate be bound to 
attend a Professor's class in each of these departments ; 
and that he have the right, out of the three Professors 
in each branch, to select the one to whom he shall 
attach himself. 

VI. That the Professorial fee, that is the sum now 
charged for tuition for two years, be divided into three 
equal parts : one part to be paid to that Professor in 
each of the three departments in whose class the under- 
graduate shall have enrolled himself. 

VII. That a fixed salary of £400 a year be provided by 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 89 

the University for each of the Professors, exclusively of 
the fees paid by the pupils. 

VIII. That there be appoipted a separate Board of 
Examiners for each of the three departments ; and that at 
least one of the public Professors of each department be a 
member of the Board. 

IX. That each Professor be required to give two 
courses of lectures: one for undergraduates; a second for 
Bachelors and other graduates. 

The scheme here propounded is obsolete in many 
respects, but it has the great merit of proceeding on 
general principles, — an entrance examination, a systematic 
division of teaching between the University and the 
Colleges, provision for advanced study and a career for the 
teacher. 

The second pamphlet was published when the author 
had become a Professor, and was stirred in his mind by 
the Report of the Royal Commission of 1872 on the 
Revenues of the University, and Mr. Gladstone's state- 
ment in the House of Commons that it was " the opinion 
of the Government that no Government can exist which 
for a moment maintains that the consideration of Univer- 
sity Reform, and consequently legislation of some kind 
will not form part of its duty." He thus states the posi- 
tion : — 

" That the University has ' requirements,' that there 
are ' University ' purposes which ought to be provided for, 
is proclaimed by the Report of the Council and admitted 
by every one connected with Oxford ; and thus the vital 
question becomes, What are these requirements of the 
University, these University purposes ? " What follows is 
still so pertinent to the actual state of things, that no 
excuse is needed for giving it with some fulness. 

" Very inadequate ideas, I fear, prevail throughout the 
nation at large, and even in Oxford herself, as to what the 
University really wants, what the defects are under which 
it labours, and what the objects which University Reform 
should seek to accomplish. The common notion is that 
many Professorships of various kinds ought to be founded, 
that the mode of Professorial appointments should be 
improved, that additional Readerships should be brought 
into play, that facilities ought to be given for allowing the 



90 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 

educational staff to marry, that the range of subjects 
taught should be enlarged, whilst, on the material side, 
funds ought to be allowed for ' buildings and institutions.' 
I feel myself sorrowfully bound to declare my conviction 
that if fifty Professorships and as many Readerships were 
created, and these other purposes provided for in addition, 
and nothing more done, University Reform will not have 
been touched, and the call on Parliament to take up this 
great national problem will remain as urgent as ever." 

Professor Price then points out that the evil dilated 
on in his first pamphlet remains unabated. " Oxford is 
afflicted with a severe malady. . . The ablest and most 
promising of her students shew a marked tendency to 
quit the University and to devote their knowledge, their 
talents, and their lives to other professions up and down 
the country ; . . on every side a University career is 
dwarfening in comparison with the brilliant prospects held 
out by the endless pursuits spread through the national 
life. This evil, by itself alone, loudly demands a remedy, 
and assuredly Professorships and Readerships, as they are 
now constituted, are no such remedy. . . There is the 
yet graver matter that there is, speaking generally, no true 
career of work in Oxford, no sphere presenting an ever- 
deepening interest to the man who embraces it, no line of 
active duty ever impelling the University teacher to make 
the most of himself, to be constantly training himself to 
a more efficient discharge of his office, no true and real 
profession. . . This unhappy state of things is the 
consequence of the unsoundness of the machinery which 
Oxford employs. Two public duties are imposed on her : 
. . . to make adequate provision for research ; . . 
secondly to give the best attainable education to the 
young men committed to her care. . . She performs 
both these great functions, fulfils both these clear duties 
imperfectly. 

" Let us now consider the first duty of the University, 
the promotion of research. The forethought of past ages 
made provision by large endowments for this purpose. 
The long array of Theological, Moral and Literary 
Sciences figures grandly in the list of its Professors. 
The physical sciences have made their appearance in this 
region. . . The world supposes that these men of 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 91 

deservedly high reputation are actively employed in the 
education of those hosts of students who throng the 
Colleges of the University. . . The supposition is a 
pure delusion. The students of Oxford do not belong to 
her Professors, nor the Professors to the students. There 
is no organic connection between them, and it is high 
time that the country should thoroughly grasp the 
fact. . . The Professors do not teach the Under- 
graduates, except in the physical sciences, where the true 
relation between teachers and pupils exists. . . They 
do not command the Examinations : their knowledge is 
not the standard which guides the distribution of 
honours or of fellowships. The University supplies no 
motive to Professors to improve themselves and extend 
its learning. That increase of learning has no value for 
the Undergraduates who are preparing for the Examina- 
tions. . . Nor does the University hold out to them 
the ordinary inducements of a great profession to exert 
and improve themselves. No prospect of reward, 
whether of money or position, stimulates their efforts. 
Their stipends are fixed, and in most cases miserably 
small, if regarded as the permanent status of a whole 
life." 

Professor Price then examines the position of the 
College teacher. "He is weighted by the University 
with most serious disadvantages. In the first place, he 
begins at the outset with a maximum of financial reward. 
The Undergraduate, flushed with honours from the 
Schools, quickly finds himself installed in a Fellowship, 
a Tutorship and one or two College offices. More he can 
scarcely acquire. The University holds up before him 
no career of increasing pecuniary advantage. To become 
a Professor is to lose income, to lose pupils, to lose 
influence in the University as a teacher. . . Then, 
secondly, his time is fully occupied with mechanical 
labour in the office of teaching. . . But it is not 
improving labour ; the germ of progress in knowledge 
is not contained in it. . . Then there springs up 
the painful fact, which almost demands to be called 
a law, that the Tutors, as they move on in years, are 
supplanted in authority and influence among the 
Undergraduate Students by their juniors, by those who 



92 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

more recently emerged from the Examinations and 
their Honours. 

" What must now be said of the second great function 
imposed upon the University, — the education which it is 
its duty to impart ? . . . The answer is easy and 
decisive. It is an education in the hands of young men, 
and given by young men ; it is not, for by the nature of 
man it cannot be, what it ought to be. . . Was Arnold 
no more powerful teacher at the end than he was at the 
commencement of his scholastic career? . . . There 
are doubtless young Tutors at Oxford who possess equal 
ability and capacity for progress with Arnold ; but he 
was not, like them, sentenced to have his onward move- 
ment arrested by pupils who cared only for honours to be 
won at examinations from which the spirit of true 
progress was absent. He was not doomed to discover 
that his own advance in thought and knowledge would 
have no value for his scholars, nay, would even be 
regarded as an impediment to the attainment of a first 
class, and to be avoided. 

" And now, is there a remedy for this lamentable 
state of things ? There is a remedy, and it will be found 
in the removal of the cause which creates the harm. 
The Colleges have absorbed the University, as Sir 
William Hamilton shewed long ago, and are responsible 
for the injuries which have ensued ; the restoration of the 
University is able to heal the wound. The students and 
their education belong of right to the University, but the 
Colleges have appropriated them. The University acts 
upon them only through the Examinations, but the 
Examinations are in the hands of the College Tutors. 
The Examinations can be only what the College Tutors 
choose to make them. . . This relation — this incorpora- 
tion of the Undergraduates into the Collegiate system 
instead of into the University — is the source of the evil 
which has been above described. . . The College, 
further, receives the fees for tuition, and distributes them 
among its Fellows at its pleasure, and with the fees are 
necessarily connected the duty to teach, and the right to 
enforce attendance at the College Lectures. This is the 
decisive fact in the whole system of Oxford. . . The 
Oxford Student is not in the possession of the Professors, 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 93 

he is owned in absolute sovereignty by the College 
Tutors. . . We are thus brought to the conclusion that 
there is but one single remedy for the unsound machinery 
which Oxford employs for accomplishing her two great 
purposes— that the teaching of the students and their fees 
should belong to the University, and not to the Colleges." 

The Professor then presents a scheme in general 
terms. " Its leading features ought to be professional 
advancement, growing in efficiency, remuneration, 
authority, and academical interest." The place of the 
College Tutors would be taken by Sub-Professors. The 
fees paid by the students would belong to the Univer- 
sity officers, but there would be a graduated scale of 
salaries. The ambition of the Sub-Professor would be 
to become a Professor and chief in his own department. 
A leading position in the work of the Examinations 
would also be assigned to the Professors, who would be 
appointed by improved methods. 

" But now the objection will be loudly raised — such a 
change would be a revolution. It would destroy the one 
distinguishing characteristic of the Universities of 
England, the College system. . . But let me ask, is the 
College feeling, the essence of College life destroyed by 
the system of joint-teaching by combined Colleges? . . 
And is it not a practice growing at Oxford ... to call in 
the aid of teachers from other Colleges, or from general 
residents in the University? On the new system, most, 
probably all the Sub-Professors would be Fellows of 
Colleges, and then the relation of the College Staff to the 
Undergraduates would be precisely what it is now in the 
combined Colleges. The only difference would be that 
the College Staffs would be appointed to the teaching 
office, not by a College arrangement, but by the election 
of the University ; the University would have to choose 
from the same men. But the altered mode of appoint- 
ment would place them under different conditions in 
respect of their academical career; and this would be 
entirely pure gain. Many of the ablest Fellows who now 
leave the University for other professions would enlist in 
its service ; and that would be an unmixed advantage for 
the College, as well as for the Undergraduates and the 
University. 



94 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

"But a still stronger bond may be devised for attaching 
the Undergraduate to his College. He needs something 
closer than the teaching of the combined Tutor or the 
Sub-Professor. He wants a friend who knows him 
personally and familiarly. . . A Vice-Head would 
exactly meet these requirements. . . I conclude that 
the objection that the College, its moral, intellectual and 
personal value, would be deeply injured, if not destroyed, 
by the creation of the Sub-Professoriate, has no 
foundation in fact. The fortunes and feelings of the 
Undergraduate would be as much bound up with the 
College as they are now." 

Newman's own verdict on the question at issue may 
fitly close this chapter. 

" I am," writes Newman, 1 " for both views at once, and 
think neither of them complete without the other. I 
admire the Professor, I venerate the College. The 
Professorial system fulfils the strict idea of a University, 
and is sufficient for its being, but it is not sufficient for 
its well-being. Colleges constitute the integrity of a 
University. . . Taking a broad view of history, we 
shall find that Colleges are to be accounted the main- 
tainers of order, and Universities the centres of move- 
ment." 

But Newman, conservative as he was, had still strong 
and decided views on the historical aspect of the case. In 
a later chapter of the same book he says, 2 " Such an 
united action of the Collegiate and the National principle, 
far from being prejudicial, was simply favourable to the 
principle of an University. It was a later age which 
sacrificed the University to the College. We must look 
to the last two or three centuries, if we would witness 
the ascendancy of the College idea in the English Uni- 
versities, to the extreme prejudice, not indeed of its 
own peculiar usefulness (for that it has retained) but 
of the University itself." These views are developed 
in the chapter entitled " Abuses of the Colleges." s 
"The University is for the world, and the College is 
for the nation. The University is for the Professor, and 
the College for the Tutor; the University is for the 

l Historical Studies, Vol. III., p. 182. 2 p. 224. 3 p. 228, et sea. 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 95 

philosophical discourse, the eloquent sermon, or the 
well-contested disputation ; and the College for the 
catechetical lecture. The University is for Theology, 
Law, and Medicine, for Natural History, for Physical 
Science, and for the sciences generally and their pro- 
mulgation ; the College is for the formation of character, 
intellectual and moral, for the cultivation of the mind, 
for the improvement of the individual, for the study of 
literature, for the classics, and those rudimental sciences 
which strengthen and sharpen the intellect. The Uni- 
versity being the element of advance, will fail in making 
good its ground as it goes ; the College, from its con- 
servative tendencies, will be sure to go back, because 
it does not go forward. It would seem as if an University 
seated and living in Colleges, would be a perfect insti- 
tution, as possessing excellencies of opposite kinds." 

But Newman saw that the reality was widely 
different from his ideal picture. " This seems to me,'' 
he writes, 1 " the critical evil in the present state of the 
English Universities, not that the Colleges are strong, 
but that the University has no practical or real juris- 
diction over them. Over the members of Colleges it has 
jurisdiction, but even then, not as such, but because they 
are its own members also ; over the Head of the College, 
over the Fellows, over the corporate body, over its 
property, over its officers, over its acts and regulations 
within its own precincts, the University has no practical 
jurisdiction at all. The Tutor indeed is an University 
officer by the Statutes, but the College has made it 
its own." 

Newman instances as a further proof of College usur- 
pation that "to this day, though separate Colleges 
properly insist on the necessary qualifications, in the case 
of those who are to be admitted to their Lectures, the 
University itself is not allowed to exercise its reasonable 
right of examining its members before it matriculates 
them." 2 Newman, however, was under no illusions as to 
the difficulty of making the University supreme and the 
Colleges subordinate. " The same spirit which destroyed 
the legal incorporation of the religious principle, was the 

i p. 235. 2pp. 238-9. 



96 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

jealous enemy also of the intellectual ; and the civil power 
could as little bear an University as it bore a Church. 
Accordingly Oxford and Cambridge shared the fate of the 
Hierarchy ; the component parts of those Universities 
were preserved, but they themselves were superseded ; and 
there would be almost as great difficulties now in Protest- 
ant England, in restoring its Universities to their proper 
place, as in restoring the Church." l 

A further difficulty would be found in the great hold 
the Colleges have on their members. Here is Newman's 
well-known picture of the College system : — 

" There is no political power in England like a College 
in the Universities ; it is not a mere local body, as a Corpo- 
ration or a London company ; it has allies in every part of 
the country. When the mind is most impressionable, 
when the affections are warmest, when associations are 
made for life, when the character is most ingenuous and the 
sentiment of reverence is most powerful, the future land- 
owner, or statesman, or lawyer, or clergyman comes up to 
a College in the Universities. There he forms friendships, 
there he spends his happiest days ; and whatever is his 
career there, brilliant or obscure, virtuous or vicious, in 
after years, when he looks back on the past, he finds him- 
self bound by ties of gratitude to the memories of his 
College life. He has received favours from the Fellows, he 
has dined with the Warden or Provost ; he has uncon- 
sciously imbibed to the full the beauty and the music of 
the place. The routine of duties and observances, the 
preachings and the examinations and the lectures, the 
dresses and the ceremonies, the officials whom he feared, 
the buildings or gardens that he admired, rest upon his 
mind and his heart, and the shade of the past becomes a 
sort of shrine to which he makes continual silent offerings 
of attachment and devotion. It is a second home, not so 
tender, but more noble and majestic and authoritative. 
Through his life he more or less keeps up a connection 
with it and its successive sojourners. He has a brother 
or an intimate friend on the foundation, or he is training 
up his son to be a member of it. When he hears that a 
blow is levelled at the Colleges, and that they are in com- 

lp. 230. 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 97 

motion— that his own College, Head and Fellows, have 
met together and put forward a declaration calling on its 
members to come up and rally round it and defend it, a 
chord is struck within him, more thrilling than any other ; 
he burns with esprit de corps and generous indignation ; 
and he is driven up to the scene of his early education , 
under the keenness of his feelings, to vote, to sign, to 
protest, to do just what he is told to do, from confidence 
in the truth of the representations made to him, and from 
sympathy with the appeal. He appears on the scene of 
action ready for battle on the appointed day, and there he 
meets others like himself, brought up by the same sum- 
mons; he gazes on old faces, revives old friendships, 
awakens old reminiscences, and goes back to the country 
with the renewed freshness of youth upon him. Thus, 
wherever you look, to the North or South, to the East or 
West, you find the interests of the Colleges dominant ; 
they extend their roots all over the country, and can 
scarcely be overturned, without a revolution." l 

The picture may be too highly coloured for the 
present day, but considerations such as the above no 
doubt prompted Goldwin Smith to write at a later date 
(1868) of Oxford 2 : "I will briefly touch on the chief 
points; first, however, stating my belief that as this is 
a University of Colleges, a University of Colleges it will 
remain ; that though, for the sake of the Colleges them- 
selves, all monopolies ought to be abolished, no attempt 
to restore the old uncollegiate University can be successful 
on the ground occupied by these great foundations, with 
their wealth, their name, their social advantages ; and 
that the rational objects whereat to aim are the extension 
of the Colleges, in number or accommodation, and their 
consolidation, without loss of their individuality, or of 
the emulation of which it is the spring, into a University, 
employing their combined resources for the common 
good. To treat their ascendancy as an encroachment, 
and to propagate expectations of the revival of a Univer- 
sity in which they will again be mere private foundations 
is, I apprehend, futile ; and such language is calculated 
only to drive them back more than ever into their 
noxious isolation." 

ipp. 233-235. 2 Reorganisation of the University of Oxford, p. 13. 

H 



98 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Mark Pattison, himself the Head of a House, thus 
sums up the matter from his own particular point of 
view ' : — 

"At the time of the last Commission, in 1850, our 
disposition was to urge the distinction between the 
University and the Colleges upon the Legislature and 
the public. Out of a just jealousy of their legal rights, 
the Colleges resented the inclination which was shown 
to treat their property as equitably convertible for the 
uses of a distinct Corporation. This was done notwith- 
standing ; but, paralysed by our clamours and our 
undeniable right, the omnipotence of Parliament was 
only exerted to an extent which did not materially 
benefit the University, while it enabled the Colleges 
to complain of confiscation. Since our rights are no 
longer invaded, we have had time for reflection. We 
have learned that there is no conflict of objects or interests 
between the Colleges and the University — that they are, 
in fact, the same men under a different denomination. 
There was no point on which University reformers before 
1850 had been more unanimous and decided than in the 
assertion that the usurpation of the Colleges had been 
the destruction of Oxford. The same complaint neces- 
sarily held a prominent place in the Blue-Book of the 
Commission. Even as late as 1856 2 we find Dr. Donaldson 
reflecting that 'the subjection of the University to the 
Colleges is the cause of all that is wrong in the practical 
working of the Cambridge system ' (Classical Learning, 
p. 46.) Hence the watchword of reform was the 'Pro- 
fessorial system.' The Professor was the University 
officer, who had been supplanted by the Tutor, a College 
officer. Parliament was invoked to restore the teaching 
to the University officer. The Commission to which was 
entrusted the execution of the Act of 17 and 18 Victoria, 
c. 81, dared not do this. The teaching still remains in the 
hands of members of the Colleges. Yet we hear no more 
of the old complaint of the usurpation of University 
functions by the Colleges. The explanation of this is 

i Suggestions, pp. 46-48. 

2 Professor Bonamy Price, it will be remembered, wrote his second 
pamphlet in 1872, four years after the publication of Pattison's 
suggestions. 



UNIVERSITY V. COLLEGES. 99 

that the reformers had seized upon the great evil of the 
place, but had assigned it to a wrong cause. But this 
inefficiency did not arise from, the circumstance that the 
teacher was a Tutor and not a Professor, nor from the 
circumstance that he was a Fellow of a College, and not 
an unattached member of the University. I have always 
regarded the relation of Tutor and pupil as being a 
relation more efficacious for instruction than the relation 
of Professor and student. And I believe the soundest 
opinion among us inclines to the same side. The cause 
of the inefficiency of the teaching of Oxford in the old 
days was, as I have indicated elsewhere, to be sought in 
the low standard of attainment of the place, a standard 
common to the University and the Colleges. Provided the 
teacher be competent — i.e. provided he be a master in the 
science he professes to teach — he will gain in power by 
being brought into the close and confidential relation of 
Tutor. And University Professors are not always found 
to be at the level of existing knowledge in their special 
profession. . . The University versus the College, then, 
though it may heretofore have served the purpose of 
ascertaining our rights, and awakening us to our duties, 
is no longer a relevant issue." 

Both sides of the question have thus been presented 
to the reader. An attempt to decide between them will 
be made later on. 



CHAPTER VI. 

THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 

The history of University Reform has now been traced 
through a period of fifty years— the first half of the 
nineteenth century. How much has been accomplished 
in this time ? There has been interminable discussion, a 
ceaseless output of articles and pamphlets, abortive 
attempts in both Houses of Parliament, but exceedingly 
little practical action. Oxford has instituted a competi- 
tive examination system, and Cambridge has improved 
and extended a similar system which was already in 
existence, but beyond this next to nothing has been done. 
Yet this little has had important results especially out- 
side the two Universities. The rise in this country of the 
modern system of competitive examinations may fairly 
be dated from the Oxford Examination Statute of 1850. 
That enactment and the extensions Avhich followed made 
the Prize Fellowship possible and gradually intensified 
competition. The increased spirit of emulation produced 
the private tutor or " coach," the highly-skilled teacher 
whose function it is to impart the knowledge which the 
Universities demand in their examinations, but which 
neither they nor the Colleges supply. In Cambridge 
University private tuition was in great request, especially 
in Mathematics, and Hopkins and Routh are still remem- 
bered as two extraordinarily efficient Senior Wrangler 
makers. Along with the Prize Fellowships has come an 
increased number of Open Scholarships and Exhibitions, 
as the Colleges more and more competed with one another 
for the future winners of their Fellowships. The force of 
competition has thus invaded the Public Schools, and the 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 101 

foreseeing parent now-a-days sends the boy of promise to 
a Preparatory School where he is crammed for the open 
scholarships of a Public School, thence to the Public School 
where he continues his specialised studies with a view to 
a College Scholarship, and so on to the Fellowship. 
This has not been the end of the matter. The examina- 
tion system has spread everywhere. It conquered the 
Civil Service, first in India, then at home. Mr. Robert 
Lowe, himself an Oxford man, had " procured the inser- 
tion in the India Bill of 1853 of a provision throwing open 
the great service of India to competition for all British- 
born subjects." 1 For the same reform in the Home 
Service "the inspiration proceeded from Oxford. Two of the 
foremost champions of the change were Temple (afterwards 
Archbishop of Canterbury) and Jowett, and in the be- 
ginning of 1855 Mr. Gladstone proposed to these two 
reformers that they should take the salaried office of Ex- 
aminers under the Civil Service scheme." 2 The examination 
system even got as low down as the elementary schools, and 
in the hands of Mr. Robert Lowe produced what was known 
as " payment by results." Our age has thus become empha- 
tically an age of examinations. The University of Cam- 
bridge does not disdain to hold a Preliminary Local 
Examination where the candidates may be as young as 
they please, the only restriction being that they should 
not be over fourteen. The Ordinary B.A. Examination at 
Cambridge can be taken as often as one likes, so that 
persons so minded may, if they go the right way to work, 
be examined from early childhood to advanced old age. 
There are endless examining bodies, all with their sepa- 
rate and sometimes competing examinations. Signs are 
not wanting of a reaction, and the cry is being heard 
among educationists that a halt must be called, that 
examinations must be simplified and their number 
reduced. Whatever may be the result of this movement, 
the fact remains that the Universities, by their record in 
this matter, have proved that they are not the secluded 
and remote bodies they are sometimes conceived to be, 
and that what is done in them quietly and almost secretly, 

iMorley, Life of Gladstone, Vol. I., p. 510. 
2 lb. Vol. I., p. 512. 



102 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

may have a profound effect on national practice and 
national life. 1 

The little that the Universities effected in the way of 
internal improvement from 1800 to 1850 is sufficient com- 
ment on the wisdom of those who are always advising 
that these bodies should be left alone and allowed to 
reform themselves from within. But by 1850 public 
opinion was too strong to be any longer resisted. Atten- 
tion has been called in Chapter III. to the action taken in 
Parliament in 1837 and the demand then made for a 
Royal Commission. The story may be taken up from the 
point where it was there left. In May, 1844, Mr. W. D. 
Christie, M.P., moved in the House of Commons an 
Address to the Queen to issue a Commission to inquire 
into all matters relating to the statutes, revenues, trusts, 
privileges, and general condition as regards learning and 
religion, of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, 
and the Colleges and Halls therein. While the hon. 
Member was speaking, the House was counted out. In 
April of the next year, 1845, Mr. Christie again raised the 

i The upholders of the modern examination system might not be so 
enamoured of it, if they knew where it originally came from. " The 
introduction of the system of emulation and prizes into the higher studies 
is historically traceable to the Jesuits. The adoption of the principle of 
perpetual supervision, of repeated examinations, of weekly exercises, 
produced marvellous results in the Jesuit Colleges. For a century and 
a half these establishments carried all before them, and earned the 
praises of all, even Protestant, observers, who contrasted their energy 
and zeal with the lifeless routine of the old Universities. It was not till 
the first half of the 18th century that opinion began to turn. It required 
time for the experiment of external stimulus applied to intellectual 
development to be fairly tried and judged. It was then found, that, 
beneath this brilliant show of College exercises and prizes, was concealed 
a starved and shrivelled understanding. The work done in class was 
pattern work ; but the pupil whom the institution turned out was a 
washed-out, frivolous, superficial being. Without any hold either on the 
verities of science, or on the recorded experience of history, he was at the 
mercy of the opinions and the superstitions of the day. All the learning 
and knowledge, which was in the possession of the civilised communities 
of Europe, existed outside the Jesuit seminaries, as well as outside the 
old Universities of France and England. The rising tide of progressive 
opinion engulfed the Jesuit establishments, . . but one thing was 
adopted unchanged from the Jesuit method. This was the system of 
constant examination." Thus writes Mark Pattison in the Essays on the 
Endowment of Research , pp. 18-20. Sir William Hamilton, at p. 769-770 of 
his Discussions gives the ordinary arguments in favour of examinations as 
laid down by Melancthon in his be Studiis Adolescentnm, and adds the 
testimony of other distinguished writers. Professor Sayce, in his contri- 
bution to the Essays on the Endowment of Research, puts the arguments on 
the other side in a convenient form. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 103 

question and moved the same resolution. It was 
seconded by Mr. Ewart, and supported by Mr. Wyse, 
Mr. Hume and Lord Palmerston. It was opposed by 
Sir Robert Inglis, Mr. Beresford Hope and Mr. Goulburn, 
Chancellor of the Exchequer, and on a division was re- 
jected by 143 votes to 82, a majority of 61. 1 

The day of success did not come till five years later. 
On April 23rd, 1850, Mr. James Heywood, M.P. for North 
Lancashire, moved the following resolution in the House 
of Commons : — 

" That all systems of academical education require 
from time to time some modification, from the change of 
external circumstances, the progress of opinion, and the 
intellectual improvement of the people. 

" That in the ancient English and Irish Universities, 
and in the Colleges connected with them, the interests of 
religious and useful learning have not advanced to an 
extent commensurate with the great resources and high 
position of these bodies : that Collegiate Statutes of the 
15th century occasionally prohibit the local authorities 
from introducing any alterations into voluminous codes, 
of which a large portion are now obsolete ; that better 
laws are needed to regulate the ceremony of matriculation 
and the granting of Degrees, to diminish the exclusive- 
ness of the University Libraries, to provide for a fairer 
distribution of the rewards of scientific and literary 
merit, to extend the permission of marriage to Tutors of 
Colleges, and to facilitate the registration of electors for 
the Universities ; that additional checks might be con- 
sidered with reference to the continued extravagance of 
individual students : and that the mode of tenure of 
College property ought to be ameliorated, particularly in 
Ireland : 

" That, as it is Her Majesty's right and prerogative to 
name Visitors and Commissioners to inquire into the 
ancient Universities and Colleges of England and Ireland, 
an humble address be presented to Her Majesty, praying 
that Her Majesty would be graciously pleased to issue 
her Royal Commission of Enquiry into the state of the 
Universities and Colleges of Oxford, Cambridge, and 

l Cooper, Annals, Vol. IV., pp. 668, 676. 



104 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 

Dublin, with a view to assist in the adaptation of those 
important institutions to the requirements of modern 
times." 

" Mr. Heywood," says Molesworth, 1 " had himself been 
educated at Trinity College, Cambridge ; but being a 
Unitarian he had been prevented from taking his degree 
by a regulation of the University requiring all persons 
who wished to graduate to sign a declaration that 
they were hona-fide members of the Church of England. 
In this respect Cambridge was more liberal or more 
fortunate than the sister University ; for while she 
only required a declaration of Church membership 
before taking the degree, the other University made 
it a condition of matriculation. Thus the Noncon- 
formists, repelled at Oxford at the very entrance, 
found an asylum at Cambridge, received there the 
best education the University could afford, might 
attain to the highest honours she conferred on her 
successful students, and were only stopped at the point 
of taking the degree which should crown and complete 
a University career. Mr. Heywood was well known to 
be enthusiastically attached to his alma mater ; he had 
devoted much time and labour to the examination of 
its statutes and the study of its constitution ; he had 
thoroughly mastered the question in all its bearings ; 
he had ascertained how much the resources of the 
Universities were wasted ; and how much need there was 
of some means of reforming the abuses that had grown 
up in the course of ages, and of adapting the curriculum 
of University teaching to the circumstances of the times. 
He was also anxious to redress the grievances of which 
the Dissenters complained." 

To the surprise of the House, the Prime Minister, 
Lord John Russell, announced that, though he could not 
accept the motion, the Government would advise Her 
Majesty to issue a Royal Commission of Enquiry for the 
Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. Mr. Roundell 
Palmer (afterwards the first Lord Selborne) objected 
that the proposed Commission would be illegal, and 
moved the adjournment of the debate. The Attorney- 

i History of England, Vol. II., p. 338. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 105 

General (Sir John Jervis) explained that the Commission 
the Government proposed to issue was merely to receive 
evidence voluntarily given. The motion for the adjourn- 
ment of the debate was then carried by 273 to 81. 

On May 8th Lord John Russell, without waiting for 
the resumption of the debate, sent a letter to Prince 
Albert, the Chancellor of Cambridge University, and 
to the Duke of Wellington, the Chancellor of Oxford 
University, 1 explaining the voluntary nature of the 
Commission, and finally stating that " the utmost care 
will be taken in selecting Commissioners, who maynot 
only be well qualified for their important task, but who 
may inspire confidence and respect by their character 
and position." 

The same month a number of resident members of 
the Senate of Cambridge University addressed a long 
remonstrance to Prince Albert, their Chancellor, opposing 
the Commission on the familiar grounds that the 
University was reforming itself already, and that time was 
necessary to see the effect of the improvements made. In 
particular they objected to the Government's suggestion 
that " one object of such inquiry was to be to ascertain 
means by which the instruction given in the Colleges 
should be rendered serviceable in preparing Students for 
the Examinations in new subjects of study, lately in- 
stituted by the University " — (the Moral Sciences Tripos, 
and the Natural Sciences Tripos). 

"We have no wish to deny," the memorialists 
continued, "that such a harmony of connexion between 
the subjects of College study and of University examin- 
ations should exist. . . But we cannot help looking 
with the greatest alarm at the prospect of having attempts 
made to establish such a connexion of College and 
University subjects, by the action of any power 
extraneous to the University and the Colleges. We 

i There had been method in the choice of these distinguished person- 
ages. "Nor had the Universities neglected the more obvious means of 
resisting the attacks of their assailants. Oxford had secured as her 
Chancellor the Great Duke, who was said to command majorities in the 
House of Lords ; while Cambridge, wiser, as she fancied, in her gener- 
ation than her sister, had wooed and won the protection of Royalty itself, 
and felt safe under the shadow of the Throne." Campion in Cambridge 
Essays, 1858, p. 165. 



106 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

conceive that any attempt to compel the Colleges to 
appoint teachers or to reward proficients, by external 
agency, would be an interference with their internal 
freedom of a kind utterly unheard of except in the worst 
times, and altogether destructive of their just and ancient 
corporate rights." ' They hinted also that there might be 
a refusal to give evidence. The Vice-Chancellor, the Rev. 
Dr. Cartmell, Master of Christ's College, also addressed a 
remonstrance to the Chancellor, in which he said that the 
issuing of a Commission would be taken to imply that in 
the opinion of Her Majesty's Ministers the governing body 
of the University were unfit for their position ; thus 
regarded it would be an affront and an indignity, and as 
such would be resented. This last word in italics. 

Prince Albert replied on May 27th that he had hoped 
the Universities would have been allowed to go on without 
extraneous interference, but as the Government was 
irrevocably pledged to a Commission, he recommended 
that it should be received in a friendly spirit. 2 

On July 18th the House of Commons resumed the 
debate, when Mr. John Stuart proposed the following 
amendment: "That any advice given to Her Majesty to 
issue a Royal Commission for inquiry into the state of 
the revenues and management of any Colleges or Halls of 
the two Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, not being 
of Royal foundation, tends to a violation of the laws and 
constitution of her kingdom, and of the rights and 
liberties of Her Majesty's subjects." This amendment 
was supported by Mr. Gladstone. He was at that time 
one of the members for Oxford University, for which seat 
he had been returned in 1847, and had not yet shaken off 
his reactionary views. Mr. John Morley 3 describes the 
speech as " the last manifesto, on a high theme and on a 
broad scale, of that Toryism from which this wonderful 
pilgrim had started on his shining progress." The debate 
was again adjourned by 160 to 138. On August 31st, before 
any further discussion had taken place, the Royal Com- 
mission was issued. 

Such was the way in which the first step was taken 
in "a long journey towards the nationalisation of the 

i Cooper, Annals, Vol. V., p. 13. 
2 lb. pp. 17-18. 3 Life of Gladstone, Vol. I., p. 498. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 107 

Universities." The Commission produced an effect even 
before it reported. On May 1st, 1851, by a unanimous 
vote, the Undergraduate Fellows of King's College, 
Cambridge, resolved to relinquish their "ancient and 
undoubted privilege to claim and receive the degree of 
Bachelor in Arts in the Senate House of the said 
University without having passed any of the previous 
examinations required from the undergraduates of other 
Colleges." 1 The Oxford Commissioners were able to 
report that New College had taken similar action. 
Certain peculiar privileges, however, still appertain to 
King's College. The Provost has absolute authority 
within the precincts, and, by special composition between 
this Society and the University, its Undergraduates are 
exempt from the power of the Proctors and other 
University Officers within the limits of the College. 

The Oxford Commissioners were the Bishop of Nor- 
wich, Dr. A. C. Tait (then Dean of Carlisle), Dr. Jeune 
(Master of Pembroke College), Dr. Liddell, Head Master 
of Westminster School, J. L. Dampier, Professor Baden 
Powell, and the Rev. G. H. S. Johnson. The Rev. A. P. 
Stanley was appointed Secretary and Mr. Goldwin Smith 
Assistant Secretary. They began their sittings on 
October 19th, 1850," and reported on April 27th, 1852. 
Their duty was to "enquire into the State, Discipline, 
Studies, and Revenues " of the University, and they 
carried out their task mainly by means of printed ques- 
tions, though many witnesses were examined orally. 

Their reception was creditable neither to the Univer- 
sity nor to the Colleges. " The Governing Body," the 
Commissioners were compelled to say, " has withheld 
from us the information which we sought from the 
University through the Vice-Chancellor as its chief resi- 
dent officer; and this, as has since been intimated to 
us, with the purpose of disputing the legality of Your 
Majesty's Commission. . . From the majority of the 
Colleges, as Societies, we have received no assistance. . . 
On the subject of the Revenues of the University, and of 
many of the Colleges, we have little authentic informa- 
tion to communicate. To state the amount and nature 

1 Cooper, Annals, Vol. V., p. 31. 



108 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

of these Revenues with precision, we required the zealous 
assistance of the University and College authorities. In 
most instances such assistance has been withheld. For 
the sake of the University itself, we regret that a different 
course was not pursued." 

Such are the words which meet the reader in the first 
two pages of the Oxford Report. Nevertheless the Com- 
missioners gathered from individuals both inside and 
outside the University a vast amount of information. 
They specially instance Mr. Hey wood, " who has liberally 
furnished the Commission, not only with copies of the 
translations of the various Statutes published by him, 
but with several manuscripts which he had caused to be 
transcribed at his own cost." 

The Report itself is much more compact and better 
arranged than the subsequently-issued Cambridge Report, 
and has the great advantage of a summary of recom- 
mendations at the end. Mr. Gladstone thought it one of 
the ablest productions submitted to Parliament in his 
recollection. 

It will be of interest to go at once to the central 
question of how the Commissioners viewed the Univer- 
sity as a teaching body, involving the further question 
of the proper relations between itself and the con- 
stituent Colleges. The answer will be found on p. 45 : 
" The absorption of the University by the Colleges has 
been often brought before us in the Evidence. Great as 
are the advantages which the Colleges have conferred on 
the University, we cannot doubt that both the one and 
the other have suffered from the extent to which the 
amalgamation has been carried ; and that the restoration 
of the University to its proper superiority would, inde- 
pendently of all other considerations, be a great benefit. 
The monopoly of teaching by the Colleges has gone far to 
extinguish the Professorial system in Oxford, and, conse- 
quently, to impair, if not to destroy, the character of the 
University as a seat of learning. The absence of competi- 
tion has encouraged the apathy which has rendered some 
of the most powerful and wealthy of the Colleges the least 
useful. The strong College feeling engendered by the 
present system has superinduced a neglect, we might 
almost say an unconsciousness, of the claims of the 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 10!) 

University on the affections and the exertions of its 
Members, such as could hardly have existed had there 
been a body of men attached to the University, but 
unconnected with the Colleges. For these and other 
reasons we feel it to be a matter of great importance to 
raise up by the side of the Colleges an independent body, 
which will bear witness to the distinct existence of the 
University, and excite the Colleges to greater exertion." 

Later on (beginning at p. 92), the Commissioners 
trace the " operation of the system of University Instruc- 
tion, or rather its failure. . . During the Middle Ages, 
whilst the whole governing body of the University con- 
sisted of Teachers only, the flourishing state of the 
University indicated of itself a flourishing state of 
University teaching. These ancient Teachers generally 
gave place to the Praelectorships established by the 
University, or founded in certain Colleges ; and these 
Praelectors were (in part at least) superseded by the 
endowed Professors, who, in the Laudian Code, were form- 
ally acknowledged as the Instructors of the University. 
It may be, however, doubted whether the Professorial 
system ever attained a full development. . . The 
general fact is unquestionable that the Professors are not 
now the Teachers of the University ; and that of all the 
functions of the Academic body, that which was once, 
and which in the Statutes is still presumed to be, the 
most important, might cease to exist altogether, with 
hardly any perceptible shock to the general system of the 
place." 

The Commissioners then give reasons for restoring 
the Professorial system, and the old quarrel between 
Professors and Tutors rages over many passages of their 
Report. Mark Pattison is the foremost critic of the 
Professorial system, while Professor Halford Vaughan 
is the chief witness in its favour. The Commissioners 
proposed to establish Assistant-Professors, or Lecturers, 
a grade of Instructors subordinate to the Professors, but 
yet lecturing on the same subjects, and, if need be, acting 
as their deputies or substitutes. 1 They also came to the 
conclusion that the combination of Professorial and 
Tutorial teaching was "not only possible, but desirable," 2 

1 Report, p. 98. 2 lb. p. 99. 



110 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

and quote in their support the authority of Jowett. They 
sum up in these words : " Our conclusion therefore is, 
that for any healthy and complete scheme of University 
Reform, it will be necessary to reconstruct the Profes- 
sorial system, to procure for the Professors ample 
endowments, to raise them to an important position in 
the University, and to call to their aid a body of younger 
men, under the name of Lecturers, in order that the 
supremacy of Learning and Science may be duly 
recognised, that the permanent services of able men may 
be secured for Academical purposes, and that the Educa- 
tion of the people may be conducted on general principles 
acknowledged and authorised by the University." 1 

The Commissioners next proceed to consider means for 
restoring the Professorial system. They suggest a new 
arrangement of the Staff, better methods of appoint- 
ment, the removal of restrictions, guarantees for activity, 
increase of income, and power for the University to meet 
an advance, or an altered distribution in the several 
departments of knowledge, by making necessary changes 
with the consent of the Crown. Their other main pro- 
posals, the abolition of " close " Fellowships and Scholar- 
ships, and the creation of Non-Collegiate Students, both 
aimed at increasing the power of the University. By the 
abolition of the restrictions on endowments, they hoped 
for " a considerable accession of persons capable of doing 
honour to their respective Societies and serving the 
University." 2 They also expected that the Colleges would 
take advantage of their liberty to supplement the revenues 
of the University from their own resources. 

The Commissioners, it will be seen, were cautious in 
the removal of restrictions on Fellowships. They were 
in favour of confirming the practices of non-residence and 
of celibacy, but of doing away with the obligations to 
take Orders, to resign a Fellowship on coming into 
property, and to proceed to the superior Degrees. 
Generally on the question of endowments they say : 
" These are the recommendations we have to offer for 
re-distributing the College revenues so as to meet the 
wants of the times. In this way the Scholarships 

i lb. p. 102. 2 lb. p. 153. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. Ill 

would become stimulants to all the Schools in the 
country ; the Fellowships would act as rewards to those 
who are advancing in their studies ; the Professorships 
and Lectureships would be an object for Fellows, and 
would raise the University to its proper position as a 
seat of learning." ' Here is a career marked clearly out 
in its successive grades. 

As to University Government the Commissioners 
proposed : — 

1. " That the University should henceforth have full 
authority to make, abrogate or alter Statutes, with the 
exception of a few Fundamental Articles not to be altered 
without the consent of the Crown or some other superior 
authority." 

2. " That the right of initiating measures should be 
confined to a body comprising Professors and other 
Academical Teachers as well as the Members of the 
Hebdomadal Board. For this purpose it may be 
expedient that the body called Congregation should be 
remodelled, so as to consist of all Heads of Houses, 
the Proctors, all Professors, and Public Lecturers, 
together with the Senior Tutors of all Colleges and 
Halls ; that the members of this body should possess 
the right of originating measures ; that it should be 
convened by the Vice-Chancellor to discuss measures, 
only on the written request of a fixed number of its 
Members ; that it should be empowered to appoint 
Delegacies for discharging the functions usually belong- 
ing to the Committees of Deliberative bodies ; that its 
members should be allowed to address the House in 
English ; that measures, after being passed by this 
House of Congregation, should be proposed to the House 
of Convocation simply for acceptance or rejection, in 
the same manner that measures emanating from the 
Hebdomadal Board are now proposed ; that, these 
changes being made, the Hebdomadal Board should 
continue to discharge its executive and administrative 
functions, and should also retain its present right of 
originating measures." 2 

It is also noteworthy that Recommendation 11 runs : 

1 lb. p. 181. 2 16. p. 256. 



112 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

" That there should be a public Examination for all 
young men before Matriculation." 

The Cambridge Commissioners were the Bishop of 
Chester, Dr. Peacock (Dean of Ely), Sir John Herschell, 
Sir John Romilly (Attorney-General), and Professor 
Adam Sedgwick. They appointed as their Secretary the 
Rev. W. H. Bateson, B.D., Public Orator of the University, 
and President and Senior Bursar of St. John's College. 
Their Report strikes one as by no means so able a docu- 
ment as that submitted by their colleagues at Oxford. 
It moves along in slow and ponderous style, dropping no 
doubt many pearls of wisdom by the way, but these have 
a knack of running into dark and unsuspected corners, 
and may easily be overlooked. It contains no summary 
of recommendations to aid the tired reader. Nevertheless 
it will be well to deal with it in some detail. 

The chief abuses of which University reformers had 
made complaint were: (1) the obsolete character of the 
governing bodies ; (2) the inadequacy and the inefficiency 
of the teaching ; (3) the system of " close " Fellowships 
and Scholarships ; (4) the expensiveness of a University 
course ; and (5) Religious Tests. These five points will 
now be considered in order. 

The question of organisation is but lightly handled. 
The Commissioners point out that on March 7, 1849, the 
University had appointed a Syndicate to revise the 
Statutes. 1 This Syndicate had prepared a Draft of an 
amended Code, which included proposals to alter the 
constitution of the Caput Senatus, to limit its powers, and 
to institute a Council of Legislation. The then existing 
Constitution of the University of Cambridge is thus 
described in terms which amplify the slight sketch pre- 
viously given of it : — 

" The Senate, or Legislative Body of the University, is 
divided into two Houses, corresponding to the Academical 
distinction of Regents and Non-Regents. The Regent 
House consists of the Chancellor, the Vice-Chancellor, 
the Proctors, the Taxors, 2 the Moderators, the Esquire 

1 Report, p. 3. 

2 Officials who fixed the rents of lodging-houses and hostels to save 
the undergraduates from extortionate charges. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 113 

Bedells, ' provided they be Masters of Arts, all Masters of 
less than five, and Doctors of Divinity, Civil Law, and 
Physic, of less than two years standing ; five years in the 
former case and two in the latter being the period during 
which the rules of the University impose a liability to 
perform the duties of Regency, that is of presiding at the 
public Disputations or Exercises in the Schools. The 
Non-Regent House is composed of Masters of Arts of more 
than five years standing, of Bachelors of Divinity who 
have previously been Masters of Arts, and Doctors of 
Divinity, Civil Law and Physic, of more than two years 
standing. 

" From the Members of the two Houses there is formed 
a Council, called the Caput Senatus, or Head of the 
Senate ; consisting of the Vice-Chancellor, a Doctor in 
each of the Faculties of Divinity, Civil Law, and Physic ; 
one Non-Regent Master of Arts ; and one Regent Master 
of Arts. The appointment of the five persons who are 
associated with the Vice-Chancellor in this Council is 
made annually in the following manner: The Vice- 
Chancellor proposes the names of five persons, who are 
qualified to serve in the several capacities. Each of the 
two Proctors also proposes the names of five other persons 
so qualified. Out of the fifteen thus proposed, the Vice- 
Chancellor, the Heads of Colleges, the Doctors of the three 
Faculties and the two Scrutators 2 elect, by a majority of 
votes, five ; who, with the Vice-Chancellor constitute the 
Caput for the ensuing year. The ordinary subjects 
requiring the votes of the Senate are called Graces, under 
which name are now comprehended all Grants, Orders, 
and Rules made by the authority of the Senate for the 
administration of University affairs. The Graces are, in 
the first instance, submitted to the Caput ; each member 
of which has, by the Statutes of Elizabeth, the power of 
rejection by his sole negative voice. 3 A Grace, after 

1 Ornamental officials who are in personal attendance on the Chan- 
cellor and Vice-Chancellor. 

2 Officials who counted the votes in the Non-Regent House. 
3 This power of veto was not so absurd as it looks on the face of it, 
as any member of the Senate had the right to propose a Grace and have 
it voted on within twenty-four hours. Thus on Dec. 4, 1834, Prof. Pryme 
offered to the Senate two Graces for appointing Syndicates to consider the 
propriety of abolishing or modifying subscription on graduation. Both 
were rejected in the Caput. (Cooper, Annals, Vol. IV., p. 579.) 



114 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

passing the Caput, is publicly recited, first by the Scruta- 
tors in the Non-Regent House, and next by the Proctors 
in the Regent House. The Congregation is then sus- 
pended for a customary interval of time; and, on its 
reassembling, the Grace is again recited in the Non-Regent 
House, where, in the case of any opposition to it, the 
Scrutators collect the votes. If it be passed there by a 
majority of votes, it is then forwarded to the Regent 
House, where the Proctors observe a like form in taking 
the opinion of that House. The Grace, if passed by them, 
thereby becomes valid, and is registered in the Records of 
the University." ' 

The Syndicate had shown decided conservatism in 
the way in which they dealt with the form of government 
here described. The Commissioners say: "We cannot 
hesitate to express our pleasure to find such a proposal 
emanating from the University itself. It has evidently 
been framed with careful deliberation, and with an 
especial view as well to preserve the balance of power 
among the several Colleges, as also to prevent the excite- 
ment and rivalries of a more popular and unlimited mode 
of appointment. The suggested scheme has received the 
unanimous approval of the Syndicate, and we hope it may 
receive the sanction of the Senate." 2 Parliament, however, 
went beyond the Syndicate Report, and it is therefore 
unnecessary to say more about a form of government 
which never fully attained even a paper existence. 

The second complaint of the reformers as to the 
inadequacy and inefficiency of the teaching at the Univer- 
sities is the main charge, and there is abundant evidence 
that the Cambridge Commissioners so regarded it. Their 
chief criticism of the Professorial system as then existing 
occurs incidentally under the heading " Lecture Rooms," 
and is as follows 8 : — " The Professors, in fact, are never 
called together, or co-operate as a body, and are subject to 
no authority or control beyond the special provisions of 
their several foundations ; and if these are neglected, or 
have become inapplicable, there is no readily available 
means to enforce them in one case, or modify them in the 
other. As a natural consequence of this want of organisa- 

l Report, p. 13. 2 Report, p. 15. 3 Report, p. 115. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 115 

tion, there exists no arrangement by which the order of 
succession of the lectures is regulated and adjusted to the 
wants of the students, or by which a continuous system 
of public instruction, in any considerable department of 
study, can be properly carried out ; and though the Vice- 
Chancellor, since the institution of the new Triposes in 
1848, has been accustomed to issue, in the month of Octo- 
ber, a programme of the lectures to be given by the 
Professors in the ensuing academical year, it is not 
formed as the result of a conference among them, but 
merely records their separate answers to a circular letter 
addressed to them with a blank column, which they are 
requested to fill up with the term, place, hour, and subject 
of their lectures." 

They also report ' : " That there is a very general dis- 
satisfaction with the present state of tuition in the 
University " : and add, " It will also have been noticed that 
one of the chief embarrassments in the way of a satisfac- 
tory solution of the question consists in the difficulty 
which would be generally experienced by the smaller 
Colleges, if they were to attempt to provide a staff of 
Tutors competent, both in number and variety of attain- 
ments, to afford the requisite amount of instruction and 
with the requisite classification of the students, in all the 
departments of University study. Moreover, the diffi- 
culties to which we have referred, so far as they may have 
already been experienced by the smaller Colleges, in pro- 
viding instruction in a sufficient amount and quality for 
the present University Examinations, must in a short 
time be greatly aggravated, now that the University has 
extended its range of honours and afforded to the student 
an opportunity to win distinctions in other important 
departments of human learning." 

On the positive side they report : — " From the 
observations which we have premised we arrive at the 
conclusion, that in any plan which may be devised for 
ameliorating the state of University teaching, the two 
principal conditions to be satisfied are : (1) that there shall 
be a definite and permanent career provided for the 
teachers; and (2) that a reasonable latitude of choice 

1 pp. 74, 79. 



116 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

should be allowed to the pupils as to what teachers they 
will select for their guidance. Two other conditions of a 
secondary character, and closely connected with each 
other, are : (1) that there shall be adequate facilities for the 
classification of pupils ; (2) due economy in the adminis- 
tration of the system." * 

The Commissioners were of opinion that it was very 
desirable that a general examination should be passed by 
all students in the course of their second year. " The 
requisite provision for preparing students for this 
preliminary examination, we are disposed to leave in the 
hands of the several Colleges. . . But for the higher 
duty of instructing those who had passed the preliminary 
examination, we are desirous of creating a numerous 
staff of Public Lecturers. We should prefer the title of 
Lecturer to that of Professor or Sub-Professor, mainly 
because we think the teaching of such persons 
must be for the most part catechetical, and therefore 
different from that of the Professors. A new title 
will also be desirable on other accounts, inasmuch 
as we shall propose that both the mode of appoint- 
ment, the functions and the remuneration of these 
Instructors shall be different from any of those 
now known in the University. For we should propose 
that the remuneration of these teachers should be partly 
a fixed stipend dependent on continued residence within 
the University and on compliance with such regulations 
as may be framed for their guidance, and partly the fees 
paid by the particular pupils attending their respective 
classes. . . In our opinion it would be a satisfactory 
system if the payment (for College tuition), whatever 
might be its amount, which we think must be left to be 
determined by the University from time to time, were 
divided into two parts, according to such a proportion as 
might be deemed fitting, one of which should be devoted 
to the remuneration of the College Tutor acting in the 
capacity of sponsor or guardian of the student's conduct, 
and the other should be appropriated to defray the cost of 
his instruction, being paid to the College up to the time 
of passing the general preliminary examination, and 

1 pp. 80, 81. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 117 

afterwards to the University for the maintenance of the 
Staff of Public Lecturers. . . 

" A code of Bye-laws to be carefully framed by the 
authority of the Senate would be requisite to apportion 
among the different departments of study the fund which 
it is proposed to raise as well out of the quarterly 
payments of the students for tuition as by subsidies from 
the corporate funds of the several Colleges. 

" It appears also, that another advantage will be 
derived from the institution of the office referred to. It 
will be the means of retaining in the immediate service 
of the University a body of men of high character for 
learning and science. . > 

" We have recommended, generally, that the staff of 
Instructors who are to conduct the public teaching of the 
University should be composed of two classes — Professors 
and Public Lecturers. The first class would consist of 
men whose character for learning and ability is fully 
established, holding permanent appointments, whose 
income should be mainly at least provided by the endow- 
ment of their Chairs ; the second would be formed of men 
of less assured eminence, many of them just entering on 
public life, and looking for much of their remuneration, 
from their popularity as teachers, at least in those depart- 
ments of study where the students are numerous, and 
where it is desirable or practicable to keep in full activity 
the principle of competition, without which their func- 
tions would sooner or later be usurped by other parties. 
But even as respects this second class, there are many 
departments of study where the number of students is 
necessarily small, and where the principle of competition 
would either cease to operate or involve a needless multi- 
plication of teachers. In such cases it will rest with those 
in whom the appointment of such Professors or Lecturers 
is vested to select those who are known from their pre- 
vious character and reputation to be fully competent for 
the duties which they are required to discharge." 

The Commissioners then turn their attention to the 
Boards of Studies which they have recommended in 
various parts of the Report and find that there are Pro- 
fessors enough to form the nucleus of the following 
Boards:— (1) Board of Theological Studies, (2) Board of 



118 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Legal Studies, (3) Board of Medical Studies, (4) Board of 
Mathematical Studies, (5) Board of Classical Studies, (6) 
Board of Natural Science Studies, (7) Board of Moral 
Science Studies. Engineering Studies were to be sub- 
ordinate to the Board of Mathematical Studies to begin 
with, and Modern Language Studies to the Board of 
Moral Science Studies, to which also Modern History 
Studies were assigned. 1 

Only one of these Boards was at that time in existence 
—the Board of Mathematical Studies, which consisted of 
the four Mathematical Professors, together with the 
Moderators and Examiners for the Mathematical Tripos 
for the year, as also those of the two years immediately 
preceding. Mathematics at this time still reigned 
supreme at Cambridge. " It is this department of study 
which is pursued in the University with the greatest 
earnestness, and which occupies the greatest number of 
teachers, comprehending a very great majority of the 
College and Private Tutors ; and as long as success in the 
Mathematical Tripos continues to be the main avenue to 
Fellowships, its supremacy amongst other branches of 
academical study is not likely to be disturbed." 2 The 
Commissioners were well pleased with the way in which 
this Board had done its work. It had presented two 
Reports, the first bearing date May 19, 1849, which were 
" documents of much interest." It was clearly the model 
on which the new " General Council of Studies " s was to 
be fashioned, and is thus described : — 

" This Board, according to the constitution which we 
propose in other parts of our Report to give it, would be 
called upon to exercise larger regulating powers extending 
as well to lectures, and the cycle which they should 
follow, as to examinations. Questions of no small 
difficulty would present themselves in the distribution 
and organisation of the lectures. These lectures must be 
adapted also to the wants of students of various capacities 
and very different states of preparation ; they must 
recognise and provide for such an amount of competition 
as will allow a sufficient freedom of choice to the student 
and stimulate the exertions of the Lecturer; above all, 

i Report, p. 88. a lb. pp. 96, 97. 3 lb. p. 104. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 119 

such a Board must have the power, subject to due 
regulation and control, of recruiting the body of Lecturers 
from time to time by the addition of young men of 
distinguished power and ability. We do not conceal from 
ourselves the difficulties which would attend the successful 
working out of this or any other system for conducting 
the studies of the University, designed to supersede 
another which has been so long in operation, connected 
with so many interests, and supported, as it undoubtedly 
would be, by all those who are adverse from principle or 
habit to all considerable changes ; but we have ventured 
to propose it as being, in our opinion, calculated to remove 
some evils and anomalies which are of a very serious 
nature, and also to restore to the public teaching of the 
University its just influence and authority." ' 

The Commissioners continue to dole out their views 
all through the Report in this fragmentary fashion, so 
that when we reach the section dealing with the Board of 
Classical Studies, to which it was proposed to give the 
same powers as were to be given to the Mathematical 
Board, we find the following additional remarks : — 

" It is, however, manifestly essential to the success of 
such a system of Lectures in this or any other department 
of learning or science that the attendance of students on 
the University Lecturers should not be obstructed by an 
unnecessary concurrence of Lectures on the same subjects 
in the Colleges ; for it is obvious from the relation which 
exists between a student and his College, that in a 
competition for attendance upon University or College 
Lectures, where it can be enforced in the one case and not 
in the other, the compulsory lectures will always prevail- 
It is only by strictly defining the respective provinces of 
the University and the Colleges in the education of 
students, and by preventing irregular intrusions on them, 
either on the one part or the other, that they can be 
made to work harmoniously together. To secure this 
end, it appears to us to be necessary that every candidate 
for a Degree in Arts, or for Honours in any Tripos, should 
be required to produce a certificate of his having attended, 
during the last four Terms of his residence, such a Course 

1 lb. p. 97. 



120 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

of Public University Lectures as might be thought to be 
an appropriate and adequate preparation in his particular 
line of study." x 

As for Boards of Study generally the Commissioners 
say 2 : — " We have sufficiently enlarged upon the impor- 
tance of instituting Boards of Study, corresponding to the 
several courses by which the B.A., or the Professional 
Degrees may be attainable. The several Boards would be 
composed of Professors belonging to each particular 
branch of study, together with such other Members of the 
Senate as it might be thought expedient to unite with 
them. To these Boards we would confide the regulation 
of their several departments ; their proceedings, when not 
merely administrative, being subject to the approbation 
of the Senate, and consequently to the revision of the 
Council of Legislation. We think that it would also be 
the province of each Board as well to select and nominate 
the Public Lecturers of their several branches of study, as 
also to secure in each branch due organisation of the 
teaching of the Public Lecturers and the Professors, to 
prescribe the cycle of subjects to be taught, the order in 
which they are to be taken, and to suggest and propose 
the arrangements and changes required from time to time 
to maintain the constant efficiency of the system of 
instruction. 

" But there are many questions which may arise 
affecting the relations of these Boards to each other as 
well as to the whole body of the Professors, which will 
require from time to time to be considered and determined 
by some superior authority, such as a General Council of 
Studies. 

" We recommend that a Council should be instituted, 
which should possess the power of nominating, for the 
sanction of the Senate, the candidates to fill vacant Pro- 
fessorships, when their election is not provided for by 
special Statutes ; and it might be expedient to constitute 
the same body as a General Council of Studies, who should 
be authorised to meet from time to time, and to delibe- 
rate, and, when necessary, to report to the Senate upon 
all matters which relate to the public instruction of the 

i lb., pp. 99, 100. 2 lb., pp. 103, 104. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 121 

University, and to give unity of action to the Boards who 
preside over its several departments. In this Council all 
Professors would naturally be included. It might, how- 
ever, be objected that if it were composed of Professors 
only, its members would be disposed to view the questions 
submitted to them rather with reference to the interests of 
the class to which they belonged than to those of the 
University at large ; that in elections and the distribution 
of funds entrusted to them, a spirit of exclusion and 
favouritism might sometimes manifest itself, which would 
tend to provoke feelings of jealousy and distrust in other 
members of the University, and thus expose their recom- 
mendations to much opposition. In order to guard 
against the formation of such an exclusive spirit and to 
give to the constitution of the Board a more comprehen- 
sive and popular character, it would seem to be expedient 
to add a certain proportion of other members of the 
Senate. Thus the Vice-Chancellors of the current and 
past year, the Public Orator, the Registrary, the two 
Proctors, and the two Moderators of the current year, 
might be ex officio members of it. And if with them were 
combined a certain number of other persons, as for 
instance, two Heads of Colleges, appointed by their body, 
and eight members of the Senate, appointed by the 
Colleges according to a specified cycle, a body would be 
formed which would be little likely to be influenced by 
the personal interests and feelings of any predominant 
class of its members to such an extent as seriously to 
compromise its usefulness and impartiality." 

Ten new Professorships were thought necessary by 
the Commissioners. These were : — 

Two of Theology. 

One of General Jurisprudence. 

One of the Law of Nations and Diplomacy. 

One of Anatomy. 

One of Chemistry. 

One of Latin. 

One of Zoology. 

One of Practical Engineering. 

One of Descriptive Geometry. 
As for the additional means of endowment thereby 
rendered necessary, the Commissioners were of opinion 



122 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

that sufficient means might be found for all purposes 
without imposing upon the Colleges the burden of contri- 
buting from their corporate revenues a larger annual sum 
than under all circumstances might reasonably be ex- 
pected of them, ' but they were further of opinion that 
both staffs of Instructors, as well the College as the Public 
Lecturer, should be subsidised by payments out of the 
corporate funds of the several Colleges. To the same 
source they also looked for additional stipends in aid of 
the existing Staff of Professors, and to endow such new 
Chairs as may appear to be necessary. 2 

With regard to the principles upon which the emolu- 
ments of Professors should be regulated, the Com- 
missioners quote with approval Sir William Hamilton's 
condensation of Lord Bacon's triple appeal to the Crown 
and to the Nation on the wisdom and necessity of dealing 
liberally with teachers, 3 and add, " We should be induced 
not to fix the incomes of the Professors as high as that 
which other professional employments would generally 
secure for them, and in mentioning incomes varying from 
£400 to £800 per annum, attainable at a moderately early 
period of life, we indicate a scale by which the University 
would probably be able to command the services of men 
of the highest order in every department of science and 
learning. . . In the framing of the Statutes for regu- 
lating the Professorships or Lectureships to be hereafter 
founded, or those already in existence, which receive an 
augmentation of income, there are some conditions which 
should be rigorously enforced. First, residence in the 
University for at least six months in the year. Secondly, 
that the whole or a considerable part of their salary 
should not be paid unless the required Lectures had been 
delivered. If, however, the approach of old age or con- 
tinued illness should render the effective performance of 
duties no longer possible or no longer profitable to the 
University, then some part of the stipend in proportion to 
the length of service should be assigned to the Professor 
or Lecturer by way of pension with the title of emeritus." * 

As for the method of appointment of Professors, the 
Commissioners say : — " If we assume that the appointment 

1 Report, p. 102. 2 lb. p. 85. Cf. Pattison, Suggestions, pp. 57, 58. 

3 Discussions, Appendix C, p. 784. 4 Report, p. 115. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 123 

to Professorships which have been created by special 
Founders should continue to be regulated by the special 
provisions of their deeds of foundation, it becomes a 
question of no small difficulty, but of paramount import- 
ance, to determine the best and safest modes in which 
elections should be made to the Professorships already 
founded or to be hereafter founded by the University 
itself. . . We should be disposed to recommend a middle 
course, entrusting to a General Board or Council of 
Studies the selection of one or more candidates to be by 
them nominated to the whole body of the Senate, for 
final confirmation or election." ' 

Let us next turn to the recommendations which 
concern the Colleges, as under this head Complaints num- 
bered 2 and 3 above are dealt with incidentally. They 
are : — 

That a revision of the ancient Statutes of the Colleges 
has become a matter of urgent importance. 2 

That it would be highly beneficial to the several Col- 
leges if certain limitations on the election to Fellowships 
(excepting the case of particular Schools) were entirely 
removed by an enactment of the Legislature; and that 
such limitations should be prohibited in the case of future 
accession of endowment/ 

That it would be a great benefit to those Colleges in 
which Bye-Fellowships exist (i.e. Fellowships not on the 
Foundation, and giving the holders no share in the govern- 
ment of the College), if gradually and without prejudice 
to the interests of the existing Fellows, the different bene- 
factions were incorporated and the Fellowships made 
more nearly equal. 4 

That in the three larger Colleges there should be an 
annual election of Fellows at a fixed time ; and that 
in the other Colleges it would be convenient if, upon a 
vacancy occurring in a Fellowship, the space of twelve 
months were allowed to fill it up, beyond which time it 
should not be in the power of the Society to keep any of 
their Fellowships vacant.'' 

That the law of some of the Colleges, requiring tho 

1 Report, p. 103. a pp. 150, 151, 152. 3 pp. 157-168. 

'pp. 167, 168. 5 p. 170. 



124 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 

Fellows to enter into Holy Orders, might be relaxed so as 
to allow of a reasonable interval of time before a newly- 
elected Fellow should be required to take Orders or vacate 
his Fellowship. 1 

That Fellows of Colleges should not be required to 
reside, due precaution being taken for the transaction of 
the ordinary business of the several societies. 2 

That in revising the Statutes of the University and 
of the Colleges, it would be necessary to make provision 
for the continuance of the rule by which the condition of 
celibacy is attached to the tenure of all Fellowships. 3 

That it would be advantageous if it were enacted by 
the Legislature, that where a beneficial College lease has 
been allowed to expire, no lease of such property should 
be valid for which any fine or premium is accepted. 4 

That it would be highly desirable to make provision 
for periodical visitations of the several Colleges, and that 
it would be expedient to remove any doubts as to where 
the Visitorial authority resides in particular Colleges. 5 

The practical means by which the recommendations 
of the Report were to be carried out are thus stated : — 

" Having now indicated the principles upon which we 
think that any reform of the University and Colleges 
should be conducted, it remains to consider the practical 
means by which such principles could most satisfactorily 
be applied. There is no doubt much within the power of 
the several Colleges themselves. We believe, however, 
that no complete correction of the evils we have pointed 
out can be effected unless under the authority of the 
Legislature. How this is to be applied is a matter of 
grave consideration. The revision of Statutes, the exami- 
nation of sub-foundations, the incorporation of Bye- 
Fellows, the adjustment of the claims of Schools, the 
determination of the relative number of Fellows and 
Scholars, and many other points which we have noticed, 
involve a multiplicity of details which demand the 
greatest care, diligence, and prudence for their correct 
and satisfactory settlement. If Parliament should enter- 
tain the question of the reform of the University and its 
Colleges, it seems to us that it would be convenient to lay 

1 p. 171. 2 pp. 171, 172. 3 p. 172. 4 p. 199. 5 p. 199. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 125 

down, in an Act of the Legislature, the principles on 
which such reforms should be conducted, and to entrust 
a Board with temporary powers necessary for carrying 
them into effect. . . The results of the deliberations of 
such a Board might properly be referred to Your Majesty 
in Council for final sanction." l 

As for the fourth grievance — the expensiveness of a 
University career, the Commissioners' finding is that it 
was substantially non-existent. They say : " We have 
great satisfaction in expressing our opinion that the 
expenses of the great majority of the students are 
moderate. The fact reflects credit both on themselves, 
and on the authorities of the University and the several 
Colleges. By reference to the Evidence it will be seen 
that the necessary expense of residence is small ; and 
that the actual average expense does not exceed a 
reasonable limit." 2 

With a view to the reduction of this necessary 
expense the system of Unattached Students had been 
strongly advocated. The Commissioners reported against 
it in these words : — " It has been contended that it would 
be desirable to revert to ancient practice as far as to allow 
of matriculated students of the University, not attached 
to any College or Hall. The question has received our 
careful consideration, and we are of opinion that it would 
not be expedient to adopt any change of that nature in 
the present system of the University. It appears to us 
that one of the most striking and valuable characteristics 
of our English Universities is to be found in the domestic 
system of their education, by which habits of order and 
moral control are most satisfactorily obtained. . . The 
two systems of Collegiate and Unattached Students seem 
to us to be hardly compatible with one another ; at least 
we cannot doubt that great difficulties would be experi- 
enced in blending them harmoniously together, if the 
class of students not affiliated to some Collegiate body 
were recognised, and afterwards received any consider- 
able accession of numbers. We come, therefore, to the 
conclusion that the extension of the benefits of the 
University, so as to embrace a larger number of students 

l pp. 199, 200. 2 lb. p. 18. 



126 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

than at present exists, and more proportionate to the 
great increase of our population and national wealth, 
must be sought in a corresponding growth of our 
Collegiate system, and in such improvements of the 
existing foundations as may render them more generally 
accessible and more generally useful." ' 

They make one practical suggestion. " We think, 
however, it would be very advantageous if buildings were 
erected for the reception of students in immediate con- 
nexion with, and under the direct control of, the Collegiate 
bodies. For such Affiliated Halls we apprehend that no 
fresh powers are required. They appear to have existed 
in ancient times : sometimes under the name of Pension- 
aries ; in other cases particular Hostels were attached to 
Colleges, an instance of which is furnished by Physwick 
Hostel, belonging to Gonville Hall, which was included in 
the site of Trinity College on its foundation in 1546." 2 

It will thus be seen that the two Commissions 
came to opposite conclusions as to the admission of Non- 
Collegiate Students. The Oxford Commissioners were in 
favour of raising up by the side of the Colleges an inde- 
pendent body which would bear witness to the distinct 
existence of the University, and excite the Colleges 
to greater exertion. 8 The Cambridge Commissioners 
thought such a step both unnecessary and unwise. 

To take the last of the five points — Religious Tests. 
The Commissioners say : " Beyond this line there lies 
another and a larger question on which we do not enter ; 
namely, the expediency of admitting persons to Degrees 
in Arts and Law and Physic, who are not members of the 
Church of England. The subject would present com- 
paratively few difficulties, if it involved only the confer- 
ring of a certificate and title of Academical proficiency. 
But the real difficulty lies in another point : whether the 
internal system of Collegiate discipline and the course of 
Academical administration could be so adjusted as to 
comprehend persons of different religious opinions with- 
out the neglect of religious ordinances, the compromise 
of religious consistency, or the disturbance of religious 
peace. 

i lb. pp. 143, 144. 2 lb. p. 144. * See above, p. 109. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 127 

" Not seeking to disguise our impression of the great- 
ness of the difficulty, we yet desire to express our sense of 
the importance of the question itself. 

" The University is a great national institution ; 
invested with important privileges by the favour of the 
Crown or the authority of the Legislature. It exercises a 
most extensive influence on the education of the higher 
and middle classes of the community, and consequently 
on the intellectual, moral and social character of the 
nation. But its capacity of exercising this high preroga- 
tive fully and completely must depend on its keeping pace 
with the progress of enlightened opinion and moving in 
sympathy and unison with the spirit of the age. It is 
one of the noblest characteristics of our times that the 
barriers, which long excluded so many of our fellow sub- 
jects from the equal enjoyment of civil rights on account 
of differences in religious opinion, have happily been 
removed by the prevalence of a generous and wise policy. 
The University will be placed, more or less, in a false 
position, if it estranges itself from this great movement 
of liberal progress. There is a manifest and intelligible 
challenge to it to throw open the advantages of its system 
of education, under proper securities, as widely as the 
State has thrown open the avenues to civil rights and 
honours. Undoubtedly, many of the endowments of its 
Colleges are connected with the Church by links which it 
would be an injustice to sever. Its school of Theology is 
identified with the Church, and incapable of a separate 
existence. But, as a great school of liberal education for 
the lay professions, for the pursuits of general literature 
and science, for the business and offices of active public 
life, it should seem to be capable of a freer range and a 
more extended usefulness without any compromise of 
duty or apostacy of principle. Were it to enter on this 
more open course in a spirit of generous magnanimity, 
it might draw to itself a yet larger measure of public 
sympathy and even find increased safety in thus identify- 
ing itself with the liberal policy of the age. 

" What securities should accompany such a concession 
to public opinion ; what guarantees for internal peace 
can be provided either by regulations of the University 
or enactments of the Legislature ; how much can be 



128 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

made matter of compact, and how much must be left 
to mutual confidence between the University and any- 
new classes of students whom it may eventually be 
induced to admit ; these are questions on which we do 
not presume to express an opinion. We humbly leave 
them to the effect of time, to the wisdom of the Legis- 
lature, and to the gracious consideration of Your 
Majesty." l From all which it is clear that the Cambridge 
Commissioners were in favour of the abolition of Tests, 
though they did not venture openly to recommend it. 

The following were the recommendations as to the 
University Library : — 

" That the privilege which the Copyright Act gives to 
the University might be advantageously commuted for a 
money payment to be expended in the purchase and bind- 
ing of such works recently purchased as might be deemed 
to be worth preserving." 2 

" That if additions should hereafter be made to the 
Library, it seems desirable that a Reading-room should 
be provided, where not only Undergraduates, but also 
other persons not members of the University, might be 
allowed to consult books under proper regulations." • 

The Commissioners, in concluding their Report, 
remark with approval on the reforms already made both 
by the University and the Colleges, and continue : — 

" That the University was ready to enlarge its cycle 
of studies is proved by its instituting new Triposes of the 
Moral and Natural Sciences ; and thus affording to most 
of the Professors an extended field of usefulness. A like 
spirit has been shown by the Colleges, which in several 
instances have, at a great cost and no small sacrifice of 
personal interests, enlarged their buildings, and in all 
cases shown themselves careful guardians of their cor- 
porate property, by foregoing a part of the income of 
the existing body with a view to the prospective benefit 
of the Society. 

"Following rather than originating this opening source 
of amelioration, we have, in the foregoing Report, recom- 
mended a series of measures, in perfect harmony, as 
we conceive, with the spirit which has prompted these 

1 lb. p. 44. 2 I6. p. 129. 8 lb. p. 132. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850 129 

beginning's, though in some respects going far beyond 
them. We have proposed the restoration in its integrity 
of the ancient supervision of the University over the 
studies of its Members, by the enlargement of the Profes- 
sorial system — by the addition of such supplementary 
appliances to such system as may obviate the undue 
encroachments of that of private tuition — by opening 
avenues for acquiring Academical Honours in many new 
and distinct branches of knowledge and professional 
pursuit — by leaving to more aspiring students ample 
opportunity to devote themselves to those lines of 
acquirement in which natural bias has given them 
capacity, or in which the force of circumstances has 
rendered it urgent upon them to obtain pre-eminence ; 
while not denying to the less highly gifted the social 
advantage of an University Degree. Still following the 
same lead, though here no doubt passing beyond the 
immediate limits marked out by internal reformations, 
we have recommended the removal of all restrictions 
upon elections to Fellowships and Scholarships, and we 
have pointed out the means by which, without any real 
injury to the claims of particular Schools, all Fellowships 
and Scholarships may be placed on such a footing as to 
be brought universally under the one good rule of un- 
fettered and open competition. In a like spirit we have 
regarded the existing distribution of Collegiate emolu- 
ments. We recognise the prevailing practice by which 
Fellowships are looked upon as just rewards of eminent 
merit, and as helps and encouragements to the further 
prosecution of study or general advancement in life. 
But, at the same time, bearing in mind that the Fellows 
of Colleges were by the original constitution of the 
University in the position of Teachers, and have laborious 
duties assigned to them arising out of the old scheme of 
Academical instruction, while in modern times the 
Fellowships are frequently held by Non-residents, and 
rarely contribute in any direct way to the course of 
Academical instruction, though their emoluments far 
exceed their original value, we have thought, that in 
consideration of this practical exemption from the per- 
formance of such educational duties, it is no more than 
reasonable and equitable in return that an adequate 



130 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

contribution should be made from the Corporate Funds 
of the several Colleges towards rendering the course of 
Public Teaching, as carried on by the University itself, 
more efficient and complete." 1 

It will thus be seen that there are some striking 
differences between the Reports of the two sets of Com- 
missioners. The Oxford Commissioners boldry face the 
fundamental question of the relation of the University 
to the Colleges. They pronounce for the ancient 
supremacy of the former over the latter, but the practical 
measures which they recommend proved entirely in- 
adequate to achieve the end they had in view. The 
Cambridge Commissioners went on different lines. They 
do not touch so explicitly on the vexed question of 
University v. Colleges, nor do they exhibit the literary 
grace or the lucid arrangement of their colleagues. 
They make a great number of recommendations on all 
kinds of subjects both great and small, 2 and these are so 
mixed up together that the far-reaching nature of certain 
reforms which they advocate is in danger of being 
altogether overlooked. 

Special attention may be called to begin with to 
the recommendation on p. 104 of the Report, already 
quoted and here repeated: — "That if the General Council 
of Studies comprised all the Professors, the Vice- 
Chan cellor of the current and past year, the Public 
Orator, the Registrary, the two Proctors, the two 
Moderators, two Heads of Colleges appointed by their 
body, and eight members of the Senate ajypointed by the 
Colleges according to a cycle, a body would be formed 
which would be little likely to be influenced by the 
personal interests and feelings of any predominant class 
of its members to such an extent as seriously to com- 
promise its usefulness and impartiality." In the year 
1852 there were already twenty-one Professors, and the 
Commissioners recommended the establishment of ten 
others. 3 The composition, therefore, of the proposed 

x pp. 202, 203. 

2 Cooper, in his Annals of Cambridge, Vol. V., pp. 75—89, summarises 
their recommendations under 127 heads. A few of these have to do with 
the relations between the University and the Town. 

8 Report, p. 102. 



THE ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1850. 131 

General Council of Studies would have been mainly 
Professorial, that is to say, it would have looked at 
matters from the University standpoint. The Public 
Orator and the Registrary are two University officials, 
and it may be taken that they would have done the same. 
The two Heads and the eight members of the Senate 
appointed by the Colleges would naturally have taken the 
College point of view, while the Vice-Chancellors, the 
Proctors, and the Moderators, as discharging University 
functions, and yet very closely connected with the College 
system, might be thought likely to adopt an independent 
attitude. Sir William Hamilton himself would probably 
have been satisfied with this arrangement, as giving the 
University a preponderating voice in advising as to the 
best developments of study at Cambridge. 

There is, too, an echo of the controversies sketched in 
the preceding pages in the sentence quoted from p. 70 of 
the Report: " That if the Professors are to continue to form 
useful and essential members of the University, their 
duties must be completely assimilated with its system, 
and be modified therefore from time to time to suit the 
changes which it undergoes ; and that it is chiefly owing 
to the want of necessary readjustments to the varying 
circumstances of the University that some of them have 
lost their proper influence in its public teaching." The 
Commissioners here recognise the disrepute into which 
Professorial or University teaching had fallen, and 
suggest a method of improving it. 

Most daring of all is the suggestion (p. 82) that the 
Colleges should only be responsible for the instruction of 
the Undergraduates up to the time of their passing the 
Previous Examination, i.e. normally to their fifth term, 
and that all the instruction for Degrees should be handed 
over to the Professoriate, the fees for tuition being divided 
in a proportion to be agreed on. ' This plan would have 
put all the tuition that ought properly to be done at a 
University into the hands of the University teachers, 
leaving only the belated school teaching to the Colleges. 
The University staff of teachers, which was to be greatly 

1 This recommendation appears to be a modification of the scheme 
proposed by Mr. Bonamy Price at Oxford in 1850, and set out in Chapter 
Y. of this book. 



132 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

enlarged, was also to be subsidised from College funds. 
Two principles are here involved : (1) that the University 
should have the ultimate control of the teaching ; and (2) 
that they should so far control the College finances as to 
be able to draw from them the funds necessary to support 
the increased University staff. These principles have 
never yet been fully acted on ; they were lost sight of 
for many years, but they will one day be considered on 
their merits. 



CHAPTEK VII. 

THE UNIVERSITY ACTS OP 1854 and 1856. 

It will be remembered that it was Lord John Russell, 
who, as the head of Her Majesty's Government, advised the 
issue of the Royal Commission in 1850. In 1852, when 
the Commission reported, the Earl of Derby was Prime 
Minister, and in the Queen's Speech of November in 
that year there appeared a paragraph stating that the 
Universities had been asked to consider the recommen- 
dations of the Reports. Shortly after, the Derby Admin- 
istration was defeated in the House of Commons, and 
the Earl of Aberdeen became Prime Minister, with Mr. 
Gladstone as Chancellor of the Exchequer and Lord 
Palmerston as Home Secretary. No definite step was 
taken till December 12th, 1853, when Lord Palmerston 
sent a letter to the Chancellors of the two Universities 
couched in the following terms :— 

" Sir, — Her Majesty's Government have had before 

them the Letter addressed by my predecessor on the 

4th of October, 1852, to the Chancellor of the University 

o Oxford 

Cambridge 

"A statement was made to the House of Commons 
(subsequent to the Queen's Speech on the 11th of 
November, 1852, which stated that copies of the Com- 
missioners' Report had been sent to the two Univer- 
sities) that the Government thought it desirable that 
ample time should be allowed for a full examination 
of these matters, and that it was not intended that 
any legislation on the subject should be proposed to 
Parliament during the then current session. 

"At the same time, though it was not deemed expe- 
dient to discuss details, yet reference was made to 
some essential points with respect to which Her 
Majesty's Government conceived that it would be the 
desire of Parliament that plans of improvement should 
be entertained. 



134 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 

" These points were : — 

" 1. An alteration of the constitution of the Uni- 
versities, with a view to the more general and effective 
representation of the several main elements which 
properly enter into their composition. 

" 2. The adoption of measures which might enable the 
Universities, without weakening the proper securities for 
discipline, to extend the benefits of training to a greater 
number of students, whether in connexion or not with 
Colleges and Halls, and also to diminish the relative 
disadvantages which now attach within Colleges and Halls 
to students of comparatively limited pecuniary means. 

"3. The establishment of such rules with regard to 
Fellowships, and to the enjoyment of other College 
endowments, as might wholly abolish or greatly modify 
the restrictions which now, in many cases, attach to 
those Fellowships and endowments, and might subject 
the acquisition of such Fellowships and endowments 
generally to the effective influence of competition. 

"4. The establishment of such regulations with regard 
to Fellowships thus to be acquired by merit as should 
prevent them from degenerating into sinecures, and 
especially the enactment of a provision, that after Fellow- 
ships should have been held for such a time as might be 
thought reasonable as rewards for early exertion and 
distinction, they should either be relinquished, or should 
only continue to be held on condition of residence, 
coupled with a discharge of active duty in discipline or 
tuition, or with the earnest prosecution of private study. 

" 5. And, lastly, the establishment of provisions under 
which Colleges possessed of means either particularly 
ample, or now only partially applied to the purposes of 
education or learning, might, in conformity with the 
views which founders have often indicated, render some 
portion of their property available for the general pur- 
poses of the University beyond as well as within the 
College walls, and might thus facilitate the energetic 
prosecution of some branches of study, the importance 
of which the Universities have of late distinctly and 
specially acknowledged." 

Lord Palmerston therefore requested the Chancellor 
" to take an early opportunity of informing him what 



THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 135 

measures of improvement the University or any of the 
Colleges therein may be about to undertake, and what aid 
they may desire from Parliament in the form either of 
prohibitions, of enabling powers, or of new enactments." 

On January 13th, 1854, the Syndicate appointed by 
the University of Cambridge to consider Lord Palmer- 
ston's letter reported, and their report was unanimously 
accepted four days later. The main points in it were as 
follows : — 

1. It called attention to the labours of the Syndicate 
appointed to revise the Statutes of the University on 
March 7th, 1849 (or more than twelve months before the 
announcement of the Royal Commission), and its scheme 
for the reform of the Senate which was accepted by the 
Commissioners. 

2. It rejected the proposal to create Non-Collegiate 
students but agreed with the erection of hostels in con- 
nexion with or in dependence on the Colleges, adding 
that " where Colleges do not possess the means of build- 
ing, the purpose of providing accommodation for a greater 
number of their Students might be effected, if occasion 
required, by hiring houses in the town." 

3. As regards Professorial and other University 
foundations the Syndicate submitted "that the object in 
view might be accomplished if enabling powers, to be 
exercised for a limited time, were given by an Act of the 
Legislature to a Board of persons who should deserve the 
confidence of the University and the country." 

The other points raised in Lord Palmerston's letter 
were not dealt with because they concerned the Colleges 
and not the University. 

Mr. Gladstone had by this time shaken off the Toryism 
which had impelled him in 1850 to oppose the appoint- 
ment of the Royal Commission, and the duty fell on him 
as Member for Oxford University to frame the Oxford 
Bill on behalf of the Government. The Crimean War 
was then imminent and broke out in February, 1854. 
Mr. Gladstone, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, had 
to provide the money wherewith to carry it on, 
a sufficiently arduous task one would have imagined, 
but his heart was not in the war, but in the cause of 
educational reform. 



136 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Lord Morley thus writes of him 1 : "In none of the 
enterprises of his life was he more industrious or ener- 
getic. Before December he forwarded to Lord John 
Russell what he called a rude draft, but the rude draft 
contained the kernel of the plan that was ultimately 
carried, with a suggestion even of the names of the Com- 
missioners to whom operations were to be confided. . . 
As he began, so he advanced, listening to everybody, 
arguing with everybody, flexible, persistent, clear, practi- 
cal, fervid, unconquerable. . . ' My whole heart is in 
the Oxford Bill,' he writes (March 29), ' it is my consolation 
under the pain with which I view the character my office 
is assuming under the circumstances of war.' ' Gladstone 
has been surprising everybody here,' writes a conspicuous 
High Churchman from Oxford, ' by the ubiquity of his 
correspondence. Three-fourths of the Colleges have been 
in communication with him, on various parts of the Bill 
more or less affecting themselves. He answers everybody 
by return of post, fully and at length, quite entering into 
their case and showing the greatest acquaintance with it.' 
. . . What he saw was that if this Bill was thrown 
out, no other half so favourable would ever again be 
brought in. 

" The scheme accepted by the Cabinet was in essentials 
Mr. Gladstone's own. Jowett at the earliest stage sent 
him a comprehensive plan, and soon after, saw Lord John 
(Jan. 6). ' I must own,' writes the latter to Mr. Gladstone, 
' I was much struck by the clearness and completeness of 
his views.' The difference between Jowett's plan and 
Mr. Gladstone's was on the highly important point of 
machinery. Jowett, who all his life had a weakness for 
getting and keeping authority into his own hands, or the 
hands of those he could influence, contended that after 
Parliament had settled principles, Oxford itself could be 
trusted to settle details far better than a little body of 
great personages from outside, unacquainted with special 
wants and special interests. Mr. Gladstone, on the other 
hand, invented the idea of an Executive Commission with 
statutory powers. The two plans were printed and circu- 
lated, and the balance of opinion in the Cabinet went 

1 Life of Gladstone, Vol. I., p. 500. 



THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 137 

decisively for Mr. Gladstone's scheme. . . In drawing 
the clauses Mr. Gladstone received the help of Bethell, the 
Solicitor-General, at whose suggestion Phillimore and 
Thring were called in for further aid in what was un- 
doubtedly a task of exceptional difficulty. The process 
brought into clearer light the truth discerned by Mr. 
Gladstone from the first, that the enormous number of 
diverse institutions that had grown up at Oxford made 
resort to what he called sub-legislation inevitable ; that 
is to say, they were too complex for Parliament, and could 
only be dealt with by delegation to executive act. . . 

" Oxford, scene of so many agitations for a score of 
years past, was once more seized with consternation, 
stupefaction, enthusiasm. A few private copies of the 
draft were sent down from London for criticism. On the 
Vice-Chancellor it left 'an impression of sorrow and sad 
anticipations ' ; it opened deplorable prospects for the 
University, the Church, for religion, for righteousness. 
The Dean of Christ Church thought it not merely inexpe- 
dient, but unjust and tyrannical. Jowett, on the other 
hand, was convinced that it must satisfy all reasonable 
reformers, and added emphatically in writing to Mr. 
Gladstone, 'It is to yourself and Lord John that the Uni- 
versity will be indebted for the greatest boon that it has 
ever received.' After the introduction of the Bill the 
obscurantists made a final effort to call down one of their 
old pelting hailstorms. A petition against the Bill was 
submitted to Convocation ; happily it passed by a majority 
of no more than two." 

There is only one point in the above account which 
seems to call for criticism — the invention by Mr. Gladstone 
of the idea of an Executive Commission with statutory 
powers. As has already been pointed out in Chapter VI., 
the Cambridge Commissioners had written : " If Parlia- 
ment should entertain the question of the reform of the 
University and its Colleges, it seems to us that it would 
be convenient to lay down, in an Act of the Legislature, 
the principles upon which such reforms should be con- 
ducted, and to entrust a Board with temporary powers 
necessary for carrying them into effect. . . The result 
of the deliberations of such a Board as we have ventured 
to suggest, might properly be referred to Your Majesty in 



138 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Council for final sanction." 1 The Report of the Cam- 
bridge Syndicate, already quoted in this chapter, 
endorses this suggestion of the Commissioners, and it 
was the plan followed in 1854, 1856 and 1877. Mr. 
Gladstone's reputation will not be injured by so small 
a subtraction from the sum total of his achievements. 

Though Mr. Gladstone had framed the Bill lie 
was not put in charge of it. It was Lord John Russell 
who on March 17th, 1854, rose in the House of Commons 
to move for leave to bring in a Bill to make further 
provision for the good government of the University 
of Oxford and of the Colleges therein. 2 He asked for 
indulgence on the ground that not having had the honour 
of studying there, he had not any personal acquaintance 
with the institutions of the University of Oxford, but he 
showed in his speech a complete grasp of the situation. 
The plan of the Bill was to take in order the points raised 
in Lord Palmerston's letter to the two Chancellors. In 
the first place came the necessary alterations in the 
constitution of the University, but the Government pro- 
posals were reserved till later on in his remarks. The 
next question was the extension of the University, and 
here Lord John Russell dropped into history. " We find," 
he said, " in ancient times that the University, and not 
the Colleges, was the principal ruling body — that the 
Congregation of the leading resident Tutors, and Profes- 
sors, summoned by bell, formed the ruling body of the 
University — that at one time there were no less than 300 
Halls, to which scholars resorted to obtain the benefit of 
the education of the University. But in progress of time 
the whole of this system was subverted, and the Commis- 
sioners state that for 150 years — it appears, however, for a 
considerably longer period — the Halls have entirely dis- 
appeared, and no instruction has been given except under 
the modern system, through the medium of the Tutors 
of the different Colleges. There is, then, quite a different 
system from that which was originally established ; and 
the consequence of that different system is, that the 
education has become far more confined — that young 

i Report, pp. 199, 200. 
2 For this and the subsequent debates see Hansard, Parliamentary 
Reports, Vol. CXXXL, p. 892 and onwards. 



THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 139 

men are obliged to enter themselves of a College, they are 
obliged to receive the education given in that College, 
and they look only to that education as the means 
of obtaining whether degrees or honours, or whether 
Fellowships and the more substantial rewards of the 
University." 

Here the speaker, naturally enough, glided off into 
a discussion of the then burning topic, — education in 
Colleges by Tutors, and education in the University by 
Professors. After reviewing the advantages and dis- 
advantages of both methods, he states his own con- 
clusion : " I own it appears to me, Sir, that we have an 
opportunity, and an opportunity which we ought not to 
lose, to combine the advantage of Tutorial College tuition 
with that of Professorial teaching." He then read to the 
House a statement of the number of pupils who had 
attended the lectures of the several University Professors 
during the last two years, and continued: "Thus it will 
be perceived, in regard to all these Professorships, that 
they do not form, in fact, a part of the education of the 
University ; and therefore, when it is stated, as it is, in 
some of the works that have been issued against the 
Report of the Commissioners, that there are at present 
Professors, the obvious answer is, that no doubt there 
are at present professors, but that attendance on their 
lectures does not form any part of the road to honours or 
emoluments in the University, and that the consequence 
is, as might naturally be expected, that the studies of 
the Colleges are preferred. . . It is clear, therefore, that 
the time has come when there ought to be a junction 
between the system of teaching in the Colleges and the 
duties of the University Professors." 

Lord John Russell next turned to the question of the 
cost of a University course, reminding the House that 
" the only means of obtaining education is by becoming 
an inmate of one of the Colleges. . . The consequence, 
then, of the Colleges having this monopoly, and of the 
restrictions established in consequence of the Laudian 
Statutes, has been that those cheaper modes of living 
which were in use in former times, and by which great 
numbers of persons, otherwise poor, could obtain 
entrance into the University, all these avenues are 



140 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

shut up, and the numbers at the University have been 
very much reduced. This, therefore, is one of the 
defects for which we wish to provide a remedy — that 
there is no means of obtaining education at Oxford 
except by belonging to one of the Colleges. 

" The next point to which I wish to refer," continued 
the speaker, "is the restrictions which are placed upon 
the various emoluments, which are the rewards of learn- 
ing in the University. It is part of the same subject that 
many of these Fellowships are held by those who for 
many years have had no connection with Oxford, nor 
contributed in any way to the studies of the place, and 
thereby the means of this great University are restricted 
and frittered away. . . 

"It appears to me that some part at least of the 
revenues of the richer Colleges — that some part of those 
revenues which are not now applied to the purposes of 
learning and the purposes of teaching in the Universities, 
ought to be so applied ; and that we could not do better 
than lay down certain rules by which Professors and 
Lecturers, and others engaged in teaching in the Univer- 
sity, might receive a sufficient income and be made 
available for the future purposes of University education." 

Lord John Russell then turned from this enunciation 
of general principles to the actual text of the proposed 
measure. "What we propose in the first place is that 
instead of the Hebdomadal Board consisting of the Vice- 
Chancellor, the Proctors and twenty-three Heads of 
Houses, there shall be a body composed of twenty-four 
or twenty-five members, to be called the Hebdomadal 
Council, and to be composed in the following manner. 
We propose that the Vice-Chancellor and the two Proctors 
shall always form part of this Council, and that when the 
Vice-Chancellor for the preceding year shall not be an 
elected member he shall also form part of the Council. 
That will give three or four persons who will be members 
ex-officio. With respect to the others, we begin by form- 
ing a body, to be called, according to the ancient name, a 
' Congregation,' and which will, in fact, consist of all the 
resident teaching staff of the University. There will 
belong to that body, called a Congregation, all the Heads 
of Houses, the Tutors of Colleges, the Professors, persons 



THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 141 

bearing certain offices in the University, and others who 
are resident, upon certain conditions, and fulfilling certain 
rules which will be laid down. This body will therefore 
be numerous, and we propose that of the remaining 
twenty-one members of the Hebdomadal Council, seven 
shall be Heads of Houses, of whom six shall be chosen by 
the Congregation and one nominated by the Chancellor of 
the University. To these seven there will be added eight 
Professors, of whom the Congregation will choose six, the 
Chancellor will nominate one, and the eighth will be one 
of the Divinity Professors of the University. There will 
then remain six, who will be chosen out of the resident 
members of Congregation by the Congregation. This we 
propose as the governing body of the University. 

"The next subject is one of which I have already stated 
to you the effect — I mean the exclusive character of Col- 
lege education. 1 I propose that there should be a power 
to open private halls, which may be opened by any Master 
of Arts obtaining a licence from the Vice-Chancellor for 
that purpose. The Commissioners proposed that under- 
graduates should be permitted to live in lodgings under 
certain restrictions ; but, upon considering the matter, 
we think it a safer plan that those who are not in Colleges 
shall be in private halls, where they will be subject to 
some discipline, but where at the same time they will 
have a more economical mode of living than is to be 
obtained at present. 

" I now come to the question of preferences granted to 
those who come under one of these different denomina- 
tions — that they are related to the founder; that they 
come from a particular place or county ; or, lastly, that 
they have belonged to a particular school. . . We pro- 
pose to do away with the restrictions with respect to 
founders' kindred and to particular localities — except with 
respect to those which have been founded within 100 
years, and with respect to the lineal descendants of the 
founder. With respect to schools, we only provide in the 
cases of their claims to Fellowships that there must in 

1 As Mr. Walpole pointed out in the debate, whereas at Oxford 
undergraduates had for the most part to reside in the Colleges, in 
Cambridge very great numbers resided in lodgings. Hansard, Vol. 
CXXXL, p. 917. 



142 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

every instance be at least two scholars from whom to 
choose. . . 

" I come now to state the powers which we propose to 
give of applying part of the revenues of the Colleges for 
the purpose of increasing the funds for education in the 
University ; and in order that each College may have time 
to consider its Statutes very carefully, we propose that 
there should be for a certain limited time a Commission 
of five persons, who shall have the powers I now propose 
to state. In the first place, we propose that they should 
have the power of approving Statutes in conformity 
with the proposals of this Bill, and that after Michaelmas 
Term, 1855, if the University and the Colleges are held not 
to have performed that which is expected of them — that 
then the Commissioners shall have power to enact by 
Statute, rules in accordance with this Act, which rules 
when they have been laid before the Privy Council, have 
been approved by Her Majesty, and have for a certain 
period been placed upon the table of this House, shall 
have the force of law and be binding, as Statutes, on the 
University and the Colleges. Such being the constitution 
of the Commission, it is proposed that each of the Colleges 
shall have the power of contributing from its annual 
revenue one-fifth part towards the foundation or better 
endowment of Professorships or Lectureships ; to provide 
for the discharge of the duties thereof; to diminish the 
number of Fellowships belonging to such College, or 
suspend payment of the emoluments of any such Fellow- 
ships, with a view to the foundation of such Professorships 
or Lectureships ; or to the supply of pensions on the 
retirement therefrom of the Professors or Lecturers ; or 
to the foundation of Scholarships in the College ; or to the 
raising the income of the remaining Fellowships to any 
sum not exceeding £250 a year ; or to the erection of new 
buildings; or to the establishment of Halls, to be affiliated to 
such College, and the acquisition of grounds and buildings 
for the same ; and that they may appropriate any number, 
not exceeding one-fourth, of the Fellowships belonging to 
any College to the encouragement of the special studies 
of the schools of Mathematics, Natural Science, or Modern 
History, or of any other studies recognised or to be 
recognised by the University." 



THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 143 

Lord John Russell finished his speech with the 
following reference to University tests : — 

" Sir, there remains one question on which there is no 
provision in this Bill, hut on which I shall at any time be 
prepared to give my vote in conformity with the opinion I 
have always held. I cannot think that the whole purposes 
of the University are fulfilled while there is a test at the 
entrance of the University which hinders so many persons 
from entering it at all. But I do expect certainly that 
by the addition of those new Halls there will be facilities 
which may induce Parliament not much longer to 
interpose the obstructions which hitherto have been 
interposed, to the enjoyment of the benefits of those great 
schools by a far larger portion of Her Majesty's subjects 
than at present enjoy them. But though this is my 
opinion, I do not think it would have been wise in Her 
Majesty's Government to have decided on placing any 
proposition of the kind in the present Bill. It is a 
subject which I think should be reserved for a separate 
measure and a separate consideration." 

Mr. Miall, the Nonconformist leader, could not con- 
ceal his disappointment with this announcement. He said: 
" According to the late Census as to religious worship in 
England, it would appear that this country, religiously 
speaking, might be divided into three parts. There were 
above 5,000,000 absenters, about 5,000,000 Dissenters, and 
above 5,000,000 members of the Establishment ; three 
tolerably equal divisions. The national institutions of 
Oxford and Cambridge were to be improved and continued 
for the special and exclusive advantage of the one-third 
part of the people of these realms." Mr. Heywood 
followed in the same sense, and gave notice of his 
intention to move in Committee a clause opening the 
Universities to Dissenters. The Opposition fastened 
mainly on the proposal that the Colleges should contribute 
out of their revenues to University purposes. Leave was 
then given, and the Bill was brought in and read a first 
time. 

On April 7th the Bill was read a second time without 
a division. Lord Morley thus describes the scene : " At 
length the blessed day of the second reading came. The 
ever-zealous Arthur Stanley was present. ' A superb 



144 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

speech from Gladstone,' he records, 'in which, for the 
first time, all the arguments from our Report were 
worked up in the most effective manner. He vainly 
endeavoured to reconcile his present with his former 
position. But with this exception, I listened to his 
speech with the greatest delight. To hehold one's old 
enemies slaughtered before one's face with the most 
irresistible weapons was quite intoxicating. One great 
charm of his speaking is its exceeding good-humour. 
There is great vehemence, but no bitterness.' " l 

On April 27th, the motion having been made, " That 
Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," Mr. Heywood moved 
as an amendment that the Bill be referred to a Select 
Committee. He pointed out that in connexion with 
Fellowships two things were left untouched— compulsory 
ordination, and enforced celibacy. Mr. Disraeli sup- 
ported him (not without a desire, it may be imagined, 
of getting rid of the Bill altogether), and so did Mr. John 
Bright, on the ground of the exclusion of the Dissenters. 
The amendment was rejected by 172 to 90. 

The temper of the House was clearly shown as soon 
as it got into Committee. The clauses appointing the 
Commissioners and defining their powers were passed 
with but little difficulty. 2 But trouble began on Clause 6, 
which related to the composition of the Hebdomadal 
Council. Mr. Walpole was in favour of what was called 
sectional election, i.e. that the Heads of Colleges should 
elect the Heads to serve on the Council, and that the 
Professors should elect the Professors, and proposed 
amendments to that effect. The amendment as to the 
Heads was carried against the Government by 162 to 
149, and the Government did not resist a similar motion 
about the Professors. 

The next serious amendment was on Clause 18, which 
dealt with the way in which the new body, Congregation, 
was to be made up. The Bill proposed that it should 
consist of the following persons, among others : — 

" The Tutors of Colleges and Halls and other officers 

i Life of Gladstone, Vol. I., p. 503. 
2 The Commissioners first proposed by the Government were the 
Earl of Ellesmere, the Bishop of Ripon, Sir J. T. Coleridge, the Dean of 
Wells, and Sir J. W. Awdry. Two were subsequently added— the Earl of 
Harrowby and Mr. George Cornewall Lewis. Mr. Goldwin Smith and the 
Rev. Mr. Wayte were appointed Secretaries. 



THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 145 

engaged in the discipline of Colleges; all Masters of 
Private Halls ; all Residents who, though not actually 
holding any of the aforesaid qualifications, may have 
held one or more of them at any previous time for three 
years and upwards ; and Residents qualified in respect 
of study under this Act." 

This was a mild attempt to confine Congregation 
to the real workers and students at the University. Sir 
William Heathcote moved as an amendment that all 
these words be left out and the words " all residents " 
be substituted for them. He argued that if Congregation 
was to be useful at all, " it ought to be an epitome and 
a representation of Convocation (i.e. the whole body of 
graduates, resident and non-resident), and ought to have 
in it as many elements of Convocation as possible. His 
amendment would include the parochial clergy in Oxford, 
who would form a most desirable body of representatives 
for the clergy throughout the kingdom, and it would also 
admit the private Tutors, who, as matters stood at pre- 
sent, had no place in Congregation." The Government 
view, as expressed by Mr. Gladstone, was that " Congre- 
gation should represent the intellect and aristocracy of 
the University, and include within it the whole studying 
and the whole teaching body of the University." On a 
division Sir William Heathcote's amendment was carried 
against the Government by 135 to 104. 

Lord Morley remarks on these proceedings : " In 
Parliament the craft laboured heavily in cross-seas. - 1 
have never known,' says its pilot, ' a measure so foolishly 
discussed in Committee.' Nor was oil cast upon the 
waters by its friends. By the end of May Mr. Gladstone 
and Lord John saw that they must take in canvas. 
Accordingly on June 1st, Lord John Russell announced 
that the Government proposed to introduce clauses 
giving the Commissioners power to make Statutes for 
the Colleges under certain conditions, and to omit six- 
teen clauses of very great detail. What could not be 
got through Parliament in the way of reform was thus 
relegated to an outside but statutory body to deal with. 1 

i The most interesting thing omitted was the sub-section giving 
power to the Colleges to contribute from their annual revenues any sum 
not exceeding one-fifth part to the foundation or better endowment of 
Professorships and Lectureships in the University. 



146 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

The Bill was then discussed de novo in Committee, 
beginning on June 15th. Mr. Heywood, on the Report 
stage, moved a new clause providing that from the first 
day of Michaelmas Term, 1854, it should not be necessary 
for any person, upon matriculation at the University 
of Oxford, to make or subscribe any declaration or take 
any oath except the oath of allegiance or an equivalent 
declaration, the object of the clause being to place 
Oxford on the same footing in this respect as Cambridge. 
At Oxford, students at matriculation had to sign the 
Thirty-nine Articles and take the Oath of Supremacy. 
Dissenters were thus effectually excluded. The clause 
was read a second time by 252 to 161. Mr. Heywood 
then moved a second clause abolishing the religious test 
on taking any of the degrees in Arts, Law, or Medicine, 
but this clause was negatived by 205 to 196. He moved 
it again on the third reading, when it was carried by 
223 to 79. 

The second reading of the Bill came on in the House 
of Lords on July 6th, and was moved by Viscount 
Canning. It was agreed to without a division. In 
Committee things did not go quite so smoothly. There 
was a notable outburst by the Earl of Winchelsea, who 
on Clauses 31 and 34, which dealt with close Fellowships 
and Scholarships, said that "the present Bill proposed 
to effect the most dreadful confiscation of property thati \ 
ever took place in an enlightened country, and was the 
grossest violation of justice that ever characterised the 
Legislature of England. There never was a measure 
so fraught with evil, so unjust in principle, so iniquitous 
in its details, as this accursed Bill." But the noble Earl ' 
was only a private member. There was no official 
opposition, and after the two Houses had agreed on 
certain amendments, the Bill received the Royal Assent 
on August 7th. 

The following are the principal provisions of the Act 
as actually passed, and they will enable the reader to 
follow the final results of amendments and counter- 
amendments in the two Chambers : — 

The Preamble runs : — " Whereas it is expedient for 
the Advancement of Religion and Learning, to enlarge the 
Powers of making and altering Statutes and Regulations 



THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 147 

now possessed by the University of Oxford and the 
Colleges thereof, and to make and enable to be made 
further Provision for the Government, and for the Ex- 
tension of the said University, and for the Abrogation of 
Oaths now taken therein, and otherwise for maintaining 
and improving the Discipline and Studies and the good 
government of the said University of Oxford and the 
Colleges thereof; Be it enacted," etc. 

It will be observed that nothing is said here about the 
power given to the Colleges to contribute out of their 
funds to University purposes. This is tucked away in the 
Preamble to Clause 27. 

After appointing Commissioners and denning their 
powers, the Act sets up a Hebdomadal Council in lieu of 
the old Hebdomadal Board and frames its composition 
thus :— " The Hebdomadal Council shall consist of the 
Chancellor, the Vice-Chancellor, the Proctors, Six Heads 
of Colleges or Halls, Six Professors of the University, and 
Six Members of Convocation of not less than Five Years 
Standing, such Heads of Colleges or Halls, Professors, and 
Members of Convocation to be elected by the Congregation 
hereinafter mentioned of the said University, and the Chan- 
cellor, or in his absence the Vice-Chancellor, or his Deputy, 
being a Member of the Hebdomadal Council, shall be the 
President of such Hebdomadal Council." Twenty-four 
weeks residence during Term time was made necessary 
for continuing to hold a seat on the Council. The Vice- 
Chancellor was instructed to make a Register of Congrega- 
tion, and regulations respecting the Hebdomadal Council. 
•' Sectional election " had been in the end defeated. 

Clause 16 defines the composition of Congregation : 
" The Congregation of the University shall be composed 
of the following persons only, the said Persons being 
Members of Convocation : — 

1. The Chancellor. 

2. The High Steward. 

3. The Heads of Colleges and Halls. 

4. The Canons of Christ Church. 

5. The Proctors. 

6. The Members of the Hebdomadal Council. 

7. The Officers named in Schedule A to this Act 
annexed. 



148 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

8. The Professors. 

9. Assistant or Deputy Professors. 

10. The Public Examiners. 

11. All Residents. 

12. All such Persons as shall be provided to be 

added by Election or otherwise to the said 
Congregation by any Statute of the Uni- 
versity approved by the Commissioners, or 
(after the Expiry of the Commission) passed 
by Licence of the Crown." 
Schedule A included : — 
" Deputy Steward. 

Public Orator. 

Keeper of the Archives. 

Assessor of the Vice-Chancellor's Court. 

Registrar of the University. 

Counsel to the University. 

Bodley's Librarian. 

Radcliffe Librarian. 

Radcliffe Observer. 

Librarians and Sub-Librarians of 
University Libraries. 

Keepers of University j If authorised for the 

Museums and Re- ( Purposes of the Sche- 

positories of Arts f dule by Statute of the 

or Science. ) University." 

The inclusion of " All Residents," according to the 
amendment moved by Sir William Heathcote, was the 
most serious alteration made in the Committee stage. 
Mark Pattison thus writes of it : — " Congregation was 
called into being by the Act of 1854, and was calculated 
to have been one of the most useful of its enactments. 
That it has not been so is owing to an alteration, 
seemingly trifling, which was made in the Bill in 
Committee. Congregation was designed by Mr. Glad- 
stone to be an assembly of the persons engaged in 
teaching— a Senatus Academicus. In Committee this was 
enlarged to include all residents. This alteration added 
to the assembly about 100 members, not connected with 
the studies of the place, and waterlogged Congregation at 
one stroke. Had Mr. Gladstone's first draft been adopted, 



THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 149 

Congregation would have been a revival of the old 
distinction between Regent and Non-regent Masters. It 
would have been a notable example of what I believe will 
be found to be true, that, as the University revives, we 
shall find ourselves reviving old arrangements, not because 
they are old, but because they are the results of much 
experience." ' 

Every Statute framed by the Council was to be 
proposed first to Congregation and then, after a fixed 
interval, submitted to Convocation for final adoption or 
rejection. (Clause 17.) 

Members of Congregation were given the power of 
proposing amendments in writing to any Statute pro- 
mulgated by the Council, " which the said Council shall 
consider, and thereupon may adopt, alter, or reject. They 
were also given the power of speaking thereon in the 
English Tongue, but without the Power of moving any 
Amendment." (Clauses 18 and 20.) It is curious that an 
Act of Parliament was necessary to restore to Oxford 
graduates the right of using their own mother tongue, but 
Oxford is still strangely mediaeval in the way in which it 
sticks to Latin. 

The question of reducing the cost of a University 
course was one of the subjects most discussed in the 
debates of both Houses, and it resulted in Clauses 25- 
27 of the Act. Clause 25 provides that " It shall 
be lawful for any Member of Convocation, of such 
Standing and Qualifications as may be provided by any 
Statute hereafter to be made, to obtain a Licence from 
the Vice-Chancellor to open his Residence, if situate 
within one mile and a half of Carfax, for the Reception of 
Students, who shall be matriculated and admitted to all 
the Privileges of the University without being of necessity 
entered as Members of any Colleges or existing Hall." 
These persons were to be called Licensed Masters and their 
residences Private Halls. The University was further 
authorised to make Statutes for the regulation of these 
Private Halls, including their aggregation into one or 
more Great Halls of the University. 

These clauses are a memorable example of how even 
the wisest men may be deceived in their expectations of 

i Suggestions on Academical Organisation, p. 29. 



150 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

the good results which are to follow from a particular 
reform. Sir William Hamilton had been a strong advo- 
cate of these Halls ; the Cambridge Commissioners made 
them a special feature in their Report ; Mr. Gladstone 
was eager for the proposed right to establish private 
halls, as a change calculated to extend the numbers and 
strength of the University, and as settling the much-dis- 
puted question, whether the scale of living could not be 
reduced, and University education brought within reach 
of classes of moderate means. The plan in question has 
proved a failure. 

Clause 28 gives the Colleges power to alter their 
Statutes with respect to eligibility to Headships, Fellow- 
ships, and other College emoluments, and for that purpose 
to modify or abolish any Preference, and in the case of 
some of the Colleges for rendering portions of their Pro- 
perty available to purposes for the benefit of the Univer- 
sity, and for the conversion of Fellowships attached to 
Schools into Scholarships or Exhibitions so attached, 
subject to the approval of the Commissioners ; the said 
Commissioners being empowered to take action them- 
selves provided the Colleges failed to do so. The Univer- 
sity was also empowered to alter Trusts which had been 
in existence more than fifty years (Clause 30). 

The duty of the Colleges to help the University 
was further emphasised by Clause 38 : — " In giving 
effect to their Powers with respect to the Colleges and 
Halls, the Commissioners shall have regard, among other 
things, to making due Provision, firstly, for the Wants 
and Improvements of the College or Hall, and the 
Advancement of Religion and Learning among its own 
members; and secondly, for aid towards the Establish- 
ment of the Professoriate of the said University on an 
enlarged basis in the several main Branches of Science 
and Letters, and with adequate Duties and Emoluments, 
by appropriating Portions of the divisible Revenues of 
any College for that Purpose, in Cases where the Founder 
of the College hath directed Lectures to be delivered for 
the Benefit of the University, or where it shall appear to 
the Commissioners that the College is well able to make 
such Provision." 

Lord John Russell, in his speech on moving for leave 






THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 151 

to bring in the Bill, had mentioned one-fifth part or 20 
per cent, of the corporate revenue as the limit up to which 
a College might be allowed to contribute voluntarily to 
University purposes. There is no such percentage in the 
Act, the question of contribution being one of those 
things which were left to the Commissioners. Here again 
the Act failed. The Colleges did not provide for the needs 
of the Universities, and the matter was not even partially 
settled till the supplementary legislation of 1877. 

Clauses 43 and 44 abolished religious tests for 
Matriculation and the Bachelor's Degree, but not for 
the Master's or its equivalent Degree, or the higher 
Degrees. The indirect effect of their retention in these 
latter cases was that no Nonconformist could be a member 
of the Hebdomadal Council, or of Congregation, or of 
Convocation. He remained entirely shut out from all 
participation in the government of the University. 

The Cambridge University Bill had a far less stormy 
passage through Parliament than the corresponding 
measure for the University of Oxford, doubtless because 
it followed the lines which had already been agreed on. 
It was introduced into the House of Lords in 1855 and 
subsequently went down to the House of Commons, but 
at so late a period of the Session that it could not be 
proceeded with. It was reintroduced in the House of 
Commons in 1856 and passed its first and second readings 
without discussion. The general discussion took place 
on May 30th, on the motion that the Speaker do now 
leave the Chair. The altered importance of the occasion 
was shown by the fact that it was not the Prime 
Minister, but a subordinate member of the Government, 
Mr. Bouverie, who stated the official case. He criticised 
the University of Cambridge in strong terms. "The 
proposition he would lay down to justify the interference 
of Parliament was this— that the University of Cam- 
bridge and the Colleges were institutions having a vast 
revenue, and enormous means for the education of the 
people, and that those resources were not turned to the 
best account; but that on the contrary the result pro- 
duced was comparatively very small." 1 The Cornmis- 

i Hansard, Parliamentary Reports, Vol. CXLII., p. 809. 



152 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

sioners of 1852 estimated the income of the 17 Colleges 
at not less than £185,000 a year. The income of the 
University was £24,500, making a total of £209,500. Yet 
it appeared from the Commission Report that in the 
eleven years from 1840 to 1850 inclusive the average 
number of persons taking the B.A. degree was only 336. 
Taking the thirteen years beginning in 1620 and ending 
in 1632, before the civil troubles began, the average 
number of B.A. degrees was 293. Practically the educa- 
tional result had not increased, though the population 
had meanwhile increased from 300 to 400 per cent. It 
followed that the cost of each B.A. degree was between 
£600 and £700, or about £200 a year, independently of 
what each student paid out of his own pocket. Mr. 
Bouverie poured the greatest scorn on the Pass degree 
and detailed to the House the subjects required in the 
Previous and General Examinations, declaring that any 
intelligent boy of sixteen could prepare himself for them 
in six weeks time. Cambridge University education was 
equally defective as regards the three professions of 
Theology, Law and Medicine. He did not blame the 
University, because it had small power of self-improve- 
ment. It was troubled with an antiquated and confined 
constitution. The Bill proposed that a body to be elected 
by the resident members of the University should have 
the power of initiating measures. To that body he 
proposed to intrust, not only these legislative functions, 
but also the power of framing Statutes for amending or 
repealing the University Statutes, the code of Whitgift, 
or any other Royal Statutes in existence, together with a 
general power of imposing and altering bye-laws. The 
oaths of the University also demanded great alteration. 
" The Universities were formerly national institutions, 
practically open to all the nation, but now, by the system 
of oaths and tests which had sprung up, half the public, 
the Dissenters, were excluded from University degrees, 
and this not by any Act of Parliament, but in conse- 
quence of a letter of James I., never formally recognised, 
although acted on by the University, in which he required 
all who took degrees to subscribe to the Articles of 
the Church of England as well as to take the Oath of 
Supremacy." It was proposed by the present Bill that 



THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 153 

none of these oaths or declarations should be required 
upon taking degrees. 

In Committee, Mr. Heywood moved the following 
clause : — " From and after the first day of Michaelmas 
Term 1856, it shall not be necessary for any person on 
obtaining any Exhibition, Scholarship, or other College 
Emolument available for the assistance of an Under- 
graduate Student in his Academical Education, to make 
or subscribe any Declaration of his Religious Opinion 
or Belief, or to take any oath, any Law or Statute to 
the contrary notwithstanding." 

This was added to the Bill. 

He was also successful in amending Clause 44 so 
that Dissenters besides being admitted to take degrees 
could also become members of the Senate. The vote 
was 85 in favour to 60 against. 

In the House of Lords the Bill was also read a first 
and second time without discussion. In Committee 
Lord Lyndhurst carried an amendment negativing Mr. 
Heywood's amendment to Clause 44 on the ground 
that " it was a most important thing to take care that 
those who governed the University should be members 
of the Church of England." The voting was Content 
73; Not Content 26; Majority 47. The two Houses soon 
came to an agreement on the points of difference between 
them, and the Royal Assent was given to the Act on 
July 29th. 

The Commissioners appointed for the purposes of 
the Act were the Bishop of Lichfield (Dr. John Lonsdale, 
formerly Fellow of King's College), the Bishop of Chester 
(Dr. John Graham, sometime Master of Christ's College). 
Lord Stanley, the Right Hon. M. T. Baines, Vice- 
Chancellor Sir William Page Wood, the Right Hon. Sir 
Lawrence Peel, the Dean of Ely (Dr. George Peacock), 
and the Rev. Dr. C. J. Vaughan. The powers conferred 
on them were to remain in force till January 1st, 1859, 
with power of extension till January 1st, 1860, but no 
longer. 

The chief operative Clauses of the Act may here 
be set out. 

Clauses 5 and 6 abolished the old Caput Senatus 
and established the present Council in its stead. The 



154 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Caput accordingly came to an end on November 6th, 1856, 
and on November 7th there was elected a Council con- 
sisting of the Chancellor, the Vice - Chancellor, four 
Masters of Colleges, four Professors, and eight other 
members of the Senate, with not more than two members 
of the same College among the eight. 

Clause 7 sets up the Electoral Roll, the body 
corresponding to Congregation at Oxford. It consists 
of the members of the Senate (the equivalent of Oxford 
Convocation) who have resided for fourteen weeks at 
least of the academical year within a mile and a half 
of Great St. Mary's Church, together with all officers 
of the University, being members of the Senate, the 
Heads of Houses, the Professors, and the Public Ex- 
aminers. The Electoral Roll thus includes "all residents," 
as did Congregation at Oxford. 

The office of Vice-Chancellor was continued to the 
Heads of Colleges exclusively, two Heads having always 
to be nominated by the Council of the Senate, of whom 
the Senate elects one (Clause 21). 

By Clause 22 the oaths which had so troubled the 
mind of Sir William Hamilton were finally got rid of. It 
enacted that every oath directly or indirectly binding the 
Juror — 

Not to disclose any matter or thing relating to his 
College, although required so to do by lawful 
authority ; 

To resist or not to concur in any change in the 
Statutes of the University or Colleges ; 

To do or forbear from doing anything the doing or 

the not doing of which would tend to any such 

concealment, resistance, or non-concurrence, 

shall from the time of the passing of this Act be an illegal 

oath in the said University and the Colleges thereof, and 

no such oath shall hereafter be administered or taken. 

Objection was taken to many proposals in the Oxford 
and Cambridge Bills, but no objection was taken to this 
clause or the corresponding clause in the Act of 1854. Sir 
William Hamilton's oft-repeated accusations of perjury 
had done their work, and all parties agreed to bury the 
offending promises out of sight as speedily and quietly as 
possible. 



THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 155 

By Clause 23 any member of the University of 
such standing and qualifications as were to be hereafter 
provided by statute, may obtain a licence from the Vice- 
Chancellor to open his residence, if situate within one 
mile and a half from Great St. Mary's Church, for the 
reception of students who shall be matriculated and 
admitted to all the privileges of the University without 
being of necessity admitted as members of any College. 

By Clause 27 the Colleges were given power to 
frame new Statutes any time before January 1st, 1858, 
specially with reference to 

(i.) the Headship, Fellowships and emoluments " so as to 
insure such Fellowships and emoluments being conferred 
according to personal merits and fitness, and being re- 
tained for such periods as are likely to conduce to the better 
advancement of the interests of religion and learning " : 

(ii.) the altering and abolition of oaths : 

(iii.) redistributing or apportioning the divisible 
revenues of the College : 

(iv.) rendering portions of the College property or 
income available for University purposes : 

(v.) the opening of Fellowships and Scholarships, and 
the conversion of Fellowships into Scholarships and 
Exhibitions : 

(vi.) the creation of Open Scholarships : 

(vii.) the incorporation of Bye-Fellowships with the 
original foundation : 

(viii.) transferring to the College any trusts vested in 
any one or more of the Masters and Fellows : 

(ix.) and generally for making further provision for 
maintaining and improving the discipline, studies, and 
good government of such College, and for amending the 
Statutes from time to time. 

By Clause 26, if the University did not frame new 
Statutes to the satisfaction of the Commissioners by 
January 1, 1858, the Commissioners had power to frame 
Statutes themselves ; and by Clause 29, if a College did 
not frame Statutes or framed insufficient Statutes by 
the same date, the Commissioners had power to frame 
Statutes for it. This method of procedure proved effec- 
tive at both Universities, and in no case were the Com- 
missioners called upon to exercise their special powers. 



156 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 

Clause 45 enacts that "From and after the first day 
of Michaelmas term, 1856, no person shall be required 
upon matriculating, or upon taking, or to enable him to 
take, any Degree in Arts, Law, Medicine, or Music, in the 
said University, to take any oath or to make any declara- 
tion or Subscription whatever; but such Degree shall not, 
until the person obtaining the same shall, in such man- 
ner as the University may from Time to Time prescribe, 
have subscribed a Declaration, stating that he is bona-fide 
a Member of the Church of England, entitle him to be or 
to become a Member of the Senate, or constitute a Qualifi- 
cation for the holding of any Office, either in the Univer- 
sity or elsewhere, which was heretofore always held by 
a Member of the United Church of England and Ireland, 
and for which such Degree has heretofore constituted 
one of the Qualifications." 

The aged Lord Lyndhurst (he was now in his eighty- 
ninth year) had thus triumphed over Mr. Heywood and 
secured the exclusion of Nonconformists from membership 
of the Senate to which their degrees would otherwise 
have entitled them, and also from any share in the 
government of the University. So slowly did the idea die, 
that the University belonged to the Church of England 
and not to the nation. 

The positive results of the Acts were seen in the 
increased number of matriculations and the general 
advance of the Universities. " The work of the Royal 
Commission appointed in 1850," writes Mr. J. A. Venn, 1 
" bore fruit some years later, in the shape of a neAV and 
surprising increase in the number of students, and in the 
altered conditions of academic life and study which were 
brought to pass. . . There can be little doubt but that 
the Commission was the direct cause of the extraordinary 
rise in numbers which followed. . . During the thirty 
years 1850-1880 the numbers of the Freshmen at Cambridge 
were exactly doubled, rising from 400 to 800 per annum." 
Part of this increase, however, must be put down to the 
Act of 1871 which went so far towards abolishing religious 
tests. But when all allowances have been made, the fact 
remains that the Acts of 1854 and 1856 started the Uni- 
versities on a new period of prosperity. 
i Matriculations, pp. 16-17. 



THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 157 

Yet they by no means fulfilled all the hopes of the 
reformers. Mark Pattison writes of Oxford : ' " The inter- 
vention of the Legislature in 1854 was made by it, and 
submitted to by us, in an unhappy spirit, which, in a 
great degree falsified the relation between the parties. 
After two centuries of neglect, the House of Commons 
had been brought to the point of considering the state of 
the Universities. The movement was by no means a 
spontaneous one on the part of the House or the Govern- 
ment. They were brought to it, reluctantly enough, by 
the patient persevering efforts of a minority of University 
men. Their reluctance to touch the case was intelligible, 
for it had all the characteristics which make a business 
distasteful to members of Parliament. It was wrapt up 
in new, intricate, esoteric details, requiring much study 
to master; it related to the transcendental parts of 
education ; it involved religious party and the Established 
Church. Ill understood, the question was ill cared for. 
So much of it as could be brought upon the platform was 
made into a party topic, and debated with excited temper 
and party exaggeration. The usual result followed. The 
House passed the Government Bill, maiming it in vital 
points in its passage through Committee. 

" Our mode of receiving the measure was still less 
worthy of our character. The University of Oxford, 
remembering that its last appearance on the stage of 
history had been in resistance to the encroachment of the 
Crown, took legal advice as to whether it could not resist 
even the preliminary inquiry. Besides withholding all 
information from the Commission, a great deal of foolish 
bluster was talked about interference with private pro- 
perty and the illegality of the Commission. So great is 
the territorial influence of our great educational endow- 
ments that this unconstitutional language made an 
impression. The House of Commons only touched the 
ark of our property with half a heart. The Act nowhere 
asserts the rights of the nation over the national domain. 
The Preamble can scarcely be acquitted of dishonesty 
when in professing to recite what it was expedient to do, 
it omits to mention that the Act took powers to deal with 

l Suggestions, pp. 6, 7. 



158 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

College property. In the same temper the executive 
Commission, when it came to divert College funds to new 
uses, only diverted an insignificant fraction." 

And again, " The Act of 1854 was by no means the 
discharge in full of the Government's duty. It could not 
and did not pretend to be a reform of the Universities. 
The public and patent grievances which had long been 
urged were: — 

"1. The incompetence of the Governing Body— the 
old Hebdomadal Board of Heads of Houses and Proctors. 

" 2. The close Fellowships and Scholarships. 

" 3. Inadequate teaching — the Tutors being incompe- 
tent and the Professors silent. 

" 4. The enforcement of religious tests. 

" The Act of 1854 dealt with all four points. It treated 
1 and 2 fully and confidently. 1. It abolished the Board 
of Heads of Houses and Proctors. 2. It abolished local 
claims for Fellowships, and partially for Scholarships. 
3. It did little for No. 3 — partly from its timidity in 
dealing with College property, partly also because it was 
hoped that the abolition of close Fellowships would of 
itself raise the teaching capacities of the Tutors. 4. What 
it did under this head was the result of a compromise 
between parties in the House. The subscription was 
retained for the M.A. degree. How little of principle 
there was in the retention was shown by the Cambridge 
Act of the following year, which abolished all sub- 
scription for degrees. 

" It would be ungrateful to its framers and promoters 
not to recognise heartily the great benefits which have 
been derived from the Act of 7th August, 1854. Its 
indirect effects in stimulating the spirit of improvement 
among us have been no less important than the specific 
reforms enacted by it. The last twenty years have seen 
more improvement in the temper and the teaching of 
Oxford than the three centuries since the Reformation. 
This improvement has undoubtedly been vastly promoted 
by the Reform Bill of 1854, or at least by one of its enact- 
ments. The abolition of close Fellowships has not only 
done more for us than all the other enactments of the 
measure together, but it is the only one which has com- 
pletely answered the expectations then formed from it. 



THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 159 

But the Act of 1854 could never claim to be a settle- 
ment of the University. It was merely an enabling Act, 
removing two evils of long standing, and giving very 
inadequate relief from two others. It cannot be pre- 
mature to apply again to the Legislature to complete 
the work begun, and only begun in 1854." ' 

What is here said of Oxford applies in almost equal 
degree to Cambridge. The fact is that the two bodies 
of Commissioners went to the furthest point in their 
recommendations, the Bill as introduced by Lord John 
Russell fell short of the recommendations, the Act which 
was passed fell short of the Bill, and the subsequently 
appointed Commissioners were unable to make the best 
of the Act. 

Two proofs may be adduced in confirmation of this 
last statement. They are drawn from the fate which 
overtook the recommendations of the Cambridge Com- 
missioners with regard to (1) University teaching, and 
(2) College contributions to University purposes. " The 
Commissioners discovered, as they imagined, a panacea 
for all existing evils in the revivication (? revivification) 
of a teaching Professoriate. This teaching Professoriate 
formed the great feature of their Report ; it was to be 
the nucleus about which the elements of the reformed 
University were to crystallize. . . Accordingly a 
Syndicate was appointed for the purpose of considering 
such of the recommendations as more directly affected 
the University. . . The chief points of the Report 
were fully discussed. The glaring defects of the Profes- 
sorial system were balanced against its apparent merits 
and were found far to outweigh them. The grand scheme 
of public Lecturers by which the system was to be 
propped was seen to be a costly and hazardous experi- 
ment. . . The result was, that the Syndicate did not 
think it expedient to recommend the adoption of any 
measures for augmenting the existing means of teaching 
the students of the University by public Professors and 
public Lecturers." 2 The Executive Commission had to 
acquiesce in the decision of the Syndicate. 

i lb. p. 23-24. 
2 Campion, Cambridge Essays, 1858, pp. 167-169. 



160 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

As for College contributions to the University, the 
Executive Commission recommended " that there be paid 
into the University Chest, to be applied to University 
purposes, an annual sum equal to (say) five per cent, upon 
the distributable income of the Colleges." 1 The Univer- 
sity never got its five per cent. 

It was unfortunate that the readjustment of the rela- 
tions between the University and the Colleges was made 
to turn on the extension of the Professoriate. The 
problem could not be solved on those lines then, any more 
than it can now. The division of the teaching proposed 
by the Cambridge Commission was impracticable. The 
Colleges had simply to sit still and things went on as 
before. The long-looked for contributions from the 
Colleges disappeared with the teaching scheme. They 
had been demanded for an impossible purpose, and this 
was sufficient reason for not giving them at all. 

The general effect of these Acts on public opinion 
and the agitation for University Reform deserves a 
word of notice. Students of practical politics are well 
aware of the way in which even the partial remedying 
of a grievance affects the movement for its abolition. 
For the time being it can stop the movement altogether, 
or put off its complete success for many years. The 
larger part of the grievance may still remain, but some- 
thing has been done ; the British public is satisfied, 
and it is impossible to rouse it to further activity. 

Then, again, one chief result of the two Acts was to 
leave the Nonconformists smarting as keenly as ever 
under a sense of injustice. When the grossest of the 
educational abuses had been swept away at Oxford and 
Cambridge, and public opinion was satisfied, the Noncon- 
formists with their religious grievance were left in 
possession of the field. Educational reform, pure and 
simple, sank into the back-ground, and tests became the 
one object of agitation till the Act of 1871 partially 
removed them. These various causes produced a com- 
plete change in the character of the demand for reform. 
The question of University v. Colleges died away 
altogether; the great majority of the present generation 

i lb. p. '221. 



THE ACTS OF 1854 AND 1856. 161 

probably do not know that it was ever raised, certainly 
they are unaware of the intensity of the conflict which 
once raged round it. From 1856 then the agitation enters 
on a new phase. It becomes political; later on sub- 
sidiary educational reforms engross attention, and so the 
old contention, with its far-reaching issues, dies down and 
its memory fades away. 



CHAPTER VIII. 



1856—1871. 



As the Reform agitation which culminated in the Act 
of 1832 stirred up a movement' in favour of University 
Reform, so did the agitation which culminated in the Act 
of 1867. " In May 1866," says Mark Pattison, who was 
then Rector of Lincoln College, Oxford, " a few Members 
of Convocation met in the chambers of Mr. Osborne 
Morgan, Lincoln's Inn, to consider some University 
matters. A wish was expressed by the meeting for fuller 
information and suggestions. As no one else could be 
readily found to undertake the task, I have ventured to 
offer the following notes and hints. They are but a very 
imperfect contribution towards a scheme for making 
Oxford a University fully adequate to the wants of the 
nation." These " notes and hints " make up the volume 
entitled " Suggestions on Academical Organisation with 
especial reference to Oxford." Though now obsolete in 
many respects, as are all these old writings on University 
Reform, it yet contains so much acute criticism and so 
many wise suggestions that no one can afford to neglect 
it. Along with Sir William Hamilton's Discussions, it 
must be accounted among the chief contributions made to 
the subject. Under 

Sec. 1. Of Legislative Interference, 
Pattison thus defines his object: "My endeavour will be 
to show that the Colleges are not now performing the 
function designed by their founders, and to urge that 
they should be enabled by legislative interposition to 
resume that function." ' He next discusses the principles 
on which this legislative interposition should proceed. 
" The Legislature of this country is now fairly in presence 
of the question, What it shall do with its seminaries of 
the higher education ? That the Legislature should have 

1 Suggestions, p. 18. 



1856—1871. 163 

clearly realised the extent of its rights is the best guaran- 
tee we can have that it will recognise their limitation. 
That there is a limit to the power of the State in its 
treatment of its one great scientific corporation will not 
be questioned. It is only by perfect freedom in its inter- 
nal administration that such a corporation can discharge 
its trust." Here then is the negative limit. On the other 
side there are the positive principles of Government action. 
" Protection is not enough. It must be among the duties 
of Government, under its responsibilities to the nation, to 
watch unintermittingly over the University, and to see 
that it does in practice efficiently discharge the functions 
assigned to it. If the Legislature only steps in when 
crying abuses have accumulated, it is hardly possible that 
justice will be done by a popular assembly, heated with 
previous struggles between those who exaggerate in de- 
nouncing, and those who exaggerate in defending, the 
abuse. The University submits with discontent as to a 
tyrannical intruder, and the Legislature, unacquainted 
from disuse with the matter on which it has to legislate, 
gladly escapes from an unwelcome task by an Act, which 
passed, it dismisses the subject for an indefinite period. 
This is the point at which the University question is 
found to be involved in that more general question which 
constitutes the governmental problem of the time, both in 
this country and in Europe at large, how to hold the 
balance, namely, between centralisation and self-govern- 
ment. . . A closer connection with the central power 
would quicken our zeal and concentrate our energies." 1 

Pattison thus saw the necessity of keeping the Univer- 
sities in touch with the national life, and especially in 
touch with national education. But the method whereby 
he proposed to effect this end may not strike everybody 
as the most effective which could be found. " Why," he 
asks, " should the Crown not exercise such a function ? 
Our relations with the State might be re-established, in 
a mode as little revolutionary as may be, by giving the 
Crown the nomination of the Chancellor. He should be a 
lay person nominated for life, be unpaid, but have a paid 
secretary and an office through which all communications 

i lb. pp. 20, 21. 



164 UNIVERSITY REFOEM. 

should pass. An annual report should be laid before him 
by each University officer. It should be his duty to 
examine these reports, and to bring before the University 
Council any matters arising upon such reports. He 
should be ex-ojfficio a member of the Hebdomadal Council, 
and his motions, to be made aut per se ant per alium, 
should take precedence of those of any other member. . . 
In compensation for surrendering its right of electing its 
own Chancellor, the University should acquire an official 
recognition in place of the unofficial and somewhat ex- 
parte championship expected of her Chancellor in his 
place as a Peer in Parliament. Official recognition in the 
Government would supersede for the future spasmodic 
and occasional efforts of Parliamentary legislation. Such 
intermittent government is to be deprecated. . . But 
the Colleges once started on a new career, powers of 
internal legislation should be entrusted to the University, 
which would enable it, under proper safeguards, to avoid 
for the future a repetition of the deadlock which now 
necessitates an appeal to Parliament." 1 Whatever may 
be thought of the suggestion of a Crown-appointed Chan- 
cellor who would play the part of King Stork, rather than 
that of King Log, all will agree that a never-ending series 
of Royal Commissions, each resulting in fresh legislation, 
is a thing greatly to be deprecated. The next Royal Com- 
mission and the resulting Act of Parliament should be 
the last, and should leave the Universities free to develop 
on right lines without fear of further interference. 
Pattison next passes to 

Sec. 2. — The Constitution of the University. 
Much of what he suggests has been carried out, but some 
of his points still remain to be dealt with. As for the 
Hebdomadal Council, he suggested that the threefold 
division into Heads, Professors, and Masters should be 
replaced by a division according to the Faculties, while it 
should be relieved of all matters relating to Studies and 
Examinations, these being assigned to a separate body. 
With regard to Congregation, he writes : — 
" All that is now asked is that effect should be given 
to the original scheme of Congregation — a scheme of 

i lb. pp. 21, 22. 



1856—1871. 165 

which nothing but the name has ever been in operation. 
As if its usefulness was not sufficiently crushed by 
making it 'an Epitome of Convocation,' jealousy of its 
power went the length of — (1) dividing the vote from 
the debate; and (2) denying it the power of amending. 
Both these disabilities should be abrogated. . . When 
reconstituted as proposed, it would be a body not equal 
to the Council for the detailed conduct of business and 
shaping of measures, but likely to take broader views 
of principle and policy." 1 

On the subject of Convocation, Pattison says: "If 
Congregation were reinstated in its destined rights, it 
seems to follow that it would be necessary to put an 
end to the legislative functions of Convocation. . . It 
appears to me that this single measure, could it possibly 
be carried, would be a greater revolution in the Uni- 
versity than all the reforms of 1854, or than any other 
reforms that are thought of now. Is it not clear on the 
face of it that it would be to transfer at one stroke 
the foundation of the University from property to 
intelligence ? " 2 In spite of this strong reason for action 
Pattison hesitates. "Congregation, as we propose to 
reform it, would be a purely educational body, entirely 
divested of (professional or territorial) interests. Are we 
prepared to sever the ties which at present bind our 
national Universities to the country and its interests, 
and hand them over to intelligence ? Is our country 
ripe for such a measure ? I wish I could think so." f If 
the country was not ripe in 1868, it certainly ought to 
be ripe in 1913. This essential change and a more 
scientific method of keeping Oxford and Cambridge in 
touch with the national life will be discussed later on. 

After legislation comes administration. The chief 
executive officer of the University is the Vice-Chancellor. 
With reference to him Pattison writes: "The Vice- 
Chancellorship has been choked by an over-growth of 
merely formal duties. . . He should be set free from 
the drudgery of the desk, and from the transaction of 
purely formal business. The ceremonies attending 
degrees and presiding in Convocation might be delegated 

i lb. pp. 30-31. 2 J6. pp. 31, 32. 3 lb. p. 33. 



166 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 

to deputies (pro-Vice-Chancellors). Instead of being an 
ex-officio member of every delegacy, and so obliged to 
attend every sitting of every Board or Committee, it 
would be better that he should not be on any, but 
have reports made to him of the results arrived at 
when the work of detail had been accomplished. His 
higher energies would thus be set free for deliberation 
in Council, and his nominal presidency changed into 
a real one. His time would be more at liberty to 
cultivate the University relations with the world out- 
side. For the purpose of entertaining strangers and 
foreigners, an official residence should be assigned him 
with adequate appointments. This lofty station could 
excite no jealousy, as the existing usage might be con- 
firmed by statute— viz. that the holder of the office 
should go out at the end of four years. 1 . . I would 
leave the nomination with the Chancellor, but would 
extend his range of selection as widely as could safely 
be done. If proper security can be taken that the 
Chancellor shall no longer be a party man, and make 
party appointments, all limitations on his choice could 
be removed." 2 

After advocating the formation of a Financial Board 
to deal with University property and revenues, Pattison 
asks this revolutionary question : — 

" Why should not the Colleges be relieved of the 
burden of management of their property, and throw their 
accounts into the same office, with proper provisions for 
superintendence, in which the University business is to 
be conducted ?" 3 

Sec. 3.— Of the Endowments. 

Under this head, Pattison defines the problem thus : 
" For a great national purpose which we have in view, 
how can we make the endowments go as far as possible 
in promoting it?" 4 and he continues : " The distribution 
of the nett residue of University and College revenues 
taken together may be considered as taking place in three 
channels : — 

" 1. One portion, being the great bulk of our 

i Now reduced at Oxford to three. At Cambridge the term is two. 
2 lb. pp. 3S-40. 3 lb. p. 44. 4 lb. p. 51. 



1856—1871. 167 

income, is laid out in subsidising education, in the shape 
of Scholarships, Exhibitions to Students, and Fellowships 
to graduates. 

" 2. Another portion, of smaller amount, is expended 
in the payment of Teachers, i.e. Professors, Lecturers, 
Chaplains, Deans, or Officers of Discipline. 

" 3. Lastly, a third, but inconsiderable, fraction of 
our income is appropriated to the maintenance and 
encouragement of science and learning, canonries, head- 
ships, libraries, museums, etc." 

Sec. 4.— -Actual Distribution of the Endowment Fund. 

Pattison then considers these three in order, 
beginning with 

Subsidies to Education. 

" This outlay upon students' pensions may be made, 
according to the mode of its distribution, to answer three 
quite distinct purposes :— (1) It may be given as prizes 
to merit, and so serve to stimulate industry. (2) It may 
be given to poverty, and so serve to give the means of 
education to those who would be otherwise unable to pay 
for it. (3) It may operate as a bounty on a particular 
kind of education — i.e. it may be a mode of creating an 
artificial demand for classics, or mathematics, while the 
natural course of supply and demand would lead to the 
establishment of other kinds of education." 1 

"The complaint of the costliness of a University 
education is one of the oldest and most urgent com- 
plaints which has been standing against us. The 
reduction of College expenses was, at the time of the 
Commission of 1850, a first object with the public," and 
the Commission recommended a large augmentation of 
Open Scholarships. "The result of twelve years' experi- 
ence is that the intentions of the Commission have been 
carried out, and the expectations of the public have not 
been realised. Open Scholarships have been multiplied 
on all sides with eager rivalry. The market is glutted. 
. . . Yet University education is not cheapened. For 
what Colleges have done in the way of reduction of their 
fees and charges with one hand, they have undone with 
the other, by lavish allowances to their scholars. We 

i I&. p. 57. 



168 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

have secretly supplied fuel to the fire we were engaged 
in extinguishing. Well-to-do parents continue to make 
their sons the usual allowance, and the Scholar treats 
his £80 a year as so much pocket-money to be spent 
in procuring himself extra luxuries. . . It is said that 
the increase of the matriculations proves that a poorer 
class have reaped some of the benefit of the creation of 
Scholarships. . . But even if our increased numbers 
be to a slight extent due to the increased number of the 
Open Scholarships, this does not show that Scholarships 
aid poor men. The question is not, Has multiplication 
of Scholarships drawn more men to Oxford ? but, Has 
it brought the University within the reach of a class 
socially below the class which frequented it before? I 
think the answer must be that it has not. . . The Open 
Scholarship Fund, then, does not act as an instrument of 
University extension. It acts as prize-money. . . The 
national outlay under the head ' Scholarships and 
Exhibitions ' is so much prize-money distributed among 
the grammar-schools, the University being merely the 
competent and impartial examiner. . . There can be 
no doubt that a most powerful impulse has been given to 
the grammar-schools by the opening of the Scholarships. 
The same social class as before frequents the schools, but 
a direction and a motive have been supplied to their 
industry which were before wanting. On the University 
itself the effect has been no less beneficial. Even if it 
has not increased the numbers, or the amount of talent, it 
has brought that talent forward in a way in which it was 
not before. . . The Scholars constitute an order bound 
to study as much by the opinion of their fellows as by the 
tenure of their gowns. The existence of such an order is 
beneficial beyond its own pale by influence and example. 
Study, from being the peculiarity of an exceptional 
minority, is becoming, let us say with thankfulness, 
more and more the tone of a large proportion of the 
students in many Colleges, though in too many others 
the traditions of Eton still give the law to undergraduate 
opinion." 1 

" No one then," continues the writer, " is proposing 

i lb. pp. 56-60. 



1856—1871. 169 

to alter the present Scholarship system. But there are 
two opinions prevalent as to additions which may be 
made to the fund. 

" 1. There are many University reformers who wish 
to see a further and large creation of Prize Scholarships. 

" 2. There is an influential section of opinion which 
is in favour of a large creation of Exhibitions, which 
should not be awarded as prizes, but given to ' poor 
men.'" 1 

As for (1), the fund from which more Scholarships 
are demanded is the Fellowships. " I am ready to 
admit," says Pattison, " that the Fellowships as now 
bestowed do not answer any proper purpose, and that 
the time has come when the destination of that fund 
should be reconsidered. . . But it is not wanted for 
Scholarships. . . The scholar's gown is too often to be 
found on youths who have no vocation for science or 
literature, and whom it was no kindness to have drawn 
away from their proper destination to active life. They 
have come here as a commercial speculation. High 
wages are given for learning Latin and Greek, and they 
are sent to enlist to earn the pay. In other words, we 
fear that the Scholarships have been multiplied beyond 
the limit within which they act as an incentive to 
industry, and that they are become a bounty upon a 
privileged species of education. . . When we consider, 
out of our 1700 students, how many are here chiefly 
because they are paid to come here, the reflection will 
arise, Can an education which requires so heavy a 
pecuniary premium to get itself accepted be really the 
excellent thing we profess it to be?" 2 

A further pungent criticism follows. " Even as a 
Prize system, we are in danger of leaning too much upon 
it. These competitive examinations, even while they 
urge to work, have a fatal tendency to falsify education. 
Open Scholarships have not been an unmixed good. 
They have stirred up the schools, but they have also 
stirred up an unwholesome system of training the com- 
petitors for the race. The youth comes up with a 
varnish of accomplishment beyond his real powers. He 

i lb. p. 61. 2 lb. pp. 61-63. 



170 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

has caught the spirit of his professional trainers. He has 
learned to regard his classics, not as the portals of a real 
knowledge, but as the verbal material of an athletic 
conflict. It is useless for real genius to enter the lists 
of competition without this training. It is easy for 
mediocrity, by putting itself under training, to reach one 
of the prizes. Thus a life has been quickened among 
us, but it is not a thoroughly sound and healthy life." 1 
Pattison makes the following suggestions : — 

1. The number of Prize Scholarships might be 
diminished with advantage. 

2. The value of each Scholarship is too large. " This 
value has reached its present dimensions by the 
accidental division of the University into independent, 
and, for this purpose, rival houses. 2 Every College is 
desirous to have its rooms full, and every College is 
desirous of showing as many University honours as it 
can. Consequently the Colleges outbid each other in the 
general market for talent." 

Under 3, Pattison then makes a suggestion of great 
importance. " Fewer Scholarships, and of less money- 
value, would, I think, have fully as great an effect as at 
present, if, instead of being given away for the convenience 
of each College, they were organised on a footing common 
to the whole University. A fixed number should be 
vacant every year, assignable among the Colleges in the 
proportions of their respective contributions to the Prize 
Fund. An examination might be held twice in the year. 
It should be conducted by Boards of Examiners, one for 
each of the subjects to which prizes were assigned — one 
half of these Examiners to be appointed by the Vice- 
Chancellor, the other half by the Professors (in turns) of 
the several faculties to which the Boards would belong." 8 

Pattison then passes to consider the demand for 
more Exhibitions, or sums granted in aid of poverty. 
He is not enthusiastic about them. In the first place there 
would be the difficulty of raising a sufficiently large fund. 
In the second place a better use might be made of the 

i lb. p. 65. 

2 Pattison here shows himself aware of the defects of the College 
system, in spite of his defence of it on other occasions. 

3 lb. p. 66. 



1856—1871. 171 

money. Then the Exhibitions would probably fall to 
those who came nearest to the successful candidates in 
the Scholarship Examinations; in which case "we shall 
but have increased the number of the existing prizes, 
already too numerous, and failed in bringing up a single 
representative of a new and poorer class to Oxford." l In 
the fourth place there is "the impracticability of any 
equitable gauge of poverty, either by testimonial or 
inquiry." His own suggestion is that "it would be very 
desirable that there should be in each College a small 
reserve fund, out of which subsidies could be granted 
to meet cases (of poverty) when they occur." 2 " The 
endowment of Exhibitions," he goes on to say, "is a mode 
of meeting cost, which, even when most lavishly employed, 
can only add to our numbers by tens. It can never 
1 extend ' the University to a newer and lower class of 
English society. If this is to be done, the expensiveness 
must be attacked in its causes. Instead of subsidising 
the poor student up to the level of our expenses, we 
ought to bring down the expenses to the level of 
the poor. It is idle to say we cannot. We have never 
tried." 3 

When will these plain and true words have their due 
effect ? It is forty-five years since Pattison wrote them, 
and they describe the facts as correctly now as they did 
then. 

Pattison's first remedy for the high cost of a 
University career was the system of Unattached Students, 
i.e. of students who are members of the University 
without being members of any of the Colleges. They are 
in fact a return to the old state of things when all the 
students were of necessity non-collegiate because the 
Colleges had not yet come into existence. 

He further admits that the price of education at 
Oxford is artificially enhanced. "That this enhancement 
is due mainly to the College and Tutorial system no 
one will deny. . . Compulsory residence within College 
walls must cease to be the law of the University." 4 

i lb. p. 71. 2 lb. p. 74. 3 lb. p. 76. 

* lb. pp. 76-79. Here we have yet another criticism of the College 
system which should be read in conjunction with Pattison's defence of it 
quoted at pp. 98-99. 



172 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Pattison's second remedy was the improvement of 
the instruction given. " To cheapen the cost of a 
University education is only one half of University 
extension. The education given must be better adapted 
to the wants of the class intended to benefit by it. Let 
Oxford become, as nothing but artificial legislation 
prevents it from becoming, the first school of science 
and learning in the world, and at the same time let it 
be accessible at the cost only of board and lodging, and 
it will attract pupils enough. If what we have to teach 
requires to be bolstered up by bounties to the taught, 
that is evidence that what we have to teach is not 
recognised as of intrinsic utility. If what the public 
is calling for under the name of University extension 
means certain social advantages, at the University and 
afterwards, for their sons, let them understand that 
these advantages cannot be had cheap, and if had, ought 
to be paid for by those who get them. Exhibitions 
are a means of extending to a small additional number 
— a favoured few — this privilege. But aristocratic society 
must always remain a privilege, and always be costly. 
Social combinations apart, the necessaries of life cost 
no more in Oxford than in other towns in the South 
of England. The inducement to spend three years here 
can only be found in improving the instruction. The 
true solution of the problem of University extension 
is to be found at last not in expedients for recruit- 
ing more students, but in raising the character and 
reputation of the body of teachers." l This last is our 
author's sovereign remedy for University ills. It would 
have been interesting if he had explained in detail how 
the University was to "be accessible at the cost only 
of board and lodging." How was free tuition to have 
been provided? 

Fellowships. 

As for Fellowships, Pattison, after showing that the 
old system imposed upon the Fellow, as a condition of 
his tenure, a course of study of from twenty to twenty- 
five years, goes on to discuss the effect of the Act of 
1854 on them. He says: "The (College) ordinances in every 

1 lb. p. 81. 



1856—1871. 173 

instance abolish the statutable regulations of studies 
and exercises, as well as the obligation to proceed to 
the superior degrees. In no instance do they attempt 
to substitute an equivalent. But though no duties are 
provided for him to perform, the Fellow is maintained 
in the enjoyment of his stipend and emoluments. In 
other words, the ordinances of the Commission of 1854 
converted the Fellowships into sinecures. The Com- 
missioners found an enormous abuse existing illegally, 
and they legalised it." ! And again : " Fellowships are 
pensions conferred in recompense or acknowledgment 
of meritorious exertions in the past. . . The Com- 
missioners transferred them from the category of 
benefices entailing duties, to that of sinecure benefices 
obtainable by qualification. 2 . . They are educational 
prizes. The Fellowships, as now administered, are to 
the academical course what the Scholarships are to the 
grammar-school, so much prize-money offered for com- 
petition among the scholars." 3 

Pattison's own view is thus expressed : — " Ability 
based on force of character, on tenacity, and industry, is 
what educational endowments seek to find and bring out. 
We must keep the Fellowships as well as the Scholarships 
free from the taint of a system which invites men to come 
to the Universities, simply because they are poor, and 
because they see in them a way to a good pension on easy 
terms. To do this the prize-Fellowships must be restricted 
in numbers, and rigidly bestowed so as to bring out the 
greatest amount of exertion. . . The next stage to a 
Scholarship should be a post in the public service, with 
prospect of promotion by merit." 4 

The writer's sketch of the educational position as he 
saw it in his day can still be read with profit : — 

"Next to a regular connection between the public 
service and the University course, a re-establishment of 
the local grammar-schools would be necessary if we are 
to keep open the highway. The decay of the local 
grammar-schools had cut off the supply of men to the 
Universities at its source. But that decay itself was 
only one of the minor symptoms of the social revolution 

i lb. pp. 89, 90. 2 lb. p. 94. 3 lb. p. 98. * lb. pp. 100, 104. 



174 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

in progress. The youth of the lower middle class left 
the grammar-school because it no longer taught them 
what it was their interest to learn. The commercial 
schools grew up, which taught nothing well, but which 
professed to teach the things they wished to learn. The 
public, which judges by profession, and not by perform- 
ance, adopted the commercial academy. The local gram- 
mar-school decayed, or turned itself, in order to live, into 
a commercial school. Our middle-class youth passed into 
life without approaching the Universities, without the 
faintest trace of the culture which still remained the 
traditional culture of the nation. The whole commercial 
and moneyed class — from the great capitalists down to 
the point where it merges in the small retailer — became 
separated by an impassable gulf of education from the 
professional classes. 

" But mark well the reversal of social importance 
which had accompanied the growth of this separation. 
Down to the end of the wars of the French Revolution 
(1815), the aristocratical, political, professional, and 
clerical sections of society had been everything in social 
consideration. These classes had clung to the traditions 
of liberal education. But the enormous development of 
commerce and manufactures since 1815 has opened a new 
world to energy. The career opened by commercial enter- 
prise to the middle class is a far more tempting career 
than those opened by the old road of the professional and 
public life. The thousands who tread this path go with- 
out any education properly so called. Yet these classes 
are in possession of great political power and social con- 
sideration, which throws that of the professions into the 
shade, and almost balances the power of the territorial 
aristocracy. What is the consequence? It is that these 
moneyed classes, containing the better half of the nation's 
wealth and life, lie outside the pale of our educational 
system. What they have not got they despise. Liberal 
education confined to one half — and the least energetic 
half— of the wealthy classes, is depreciated. The great 
highway of successful life no longer lies through the 
Universities. We wish to restore the road, and maintain 
one broad-gauge line of refining education, along which 
all our youth, the aspiring and the enterprising, as well 



1856—1871. 175 

v 

as the fanieant aristocrat and the apathetic dullard, shall 
be willing to travel. It is impossible seriously to propose 
that this shall be done by pensions. What would i'100,000 
a year distributed in pensions do, if tried as a set-off 
against the prizes which await skill and energy in busi- 
ness ? Our endowment fund is considerable, but I believe 
it is not equal to this task — that of buying up, the best 
talent of the country. If we can succeed in making the 
education given meet the demands of all classes, all 
classes will desire to have it. If we want the old road to 
be travelled, we must repair it, not pay pilgrims so much 
a head, like a starving Swiss inn-keeper, for going our 
route." ! 

Of Endowments of Science and Learning. 

Under this head Pattison gives a first hint of his own 
particular scheme of University reorganisation. " The 
present scheme proposes to convert the whole of the 
Fellowship endowments from educational prizes into en- 
dowments for science and literature, and I would propose 
to include the endowments of the Headships in the same 
category."' 2 And again: "In our arrangement the Colleges 
are divided into those which, ceasing to receive boarders, 
will be appropriated to one of the incorporated Faculties, 
and into those which will remain boarding-houses." 8 

This scheme of University reform is elaborated under 
Sec. 5-6. The Re-distribution of the Endowment Fund. 
It involves the fundamental question of What is a 
University? 4 "The great bulk of our endowments — so 
large a part that we may almost say the whole — is ex- 
pended on youths under the age of twenty-four — i.e. it has 
an educational effect. What is expended on promoting 
science and learning is, by comparison, trifling, and, from 
the peculiar mode of its bestowal, almost unproductive of 
any fruits. This is the actual direction taken by the 
National Endowment Fund. And it stands in direct con- 
trast with the original destination of that fund. The 
endowments, in the design of the founders, were endow- 
ments for men and not for youth, and were not directed 
to education as a preparation for life, but to knowledge 
as a peculiar profession which withdrew men from the 

i 16. pp. 101-103. 2 16. p. 112. 3 16. p, 114. 4 j&. p . 120. 



176 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

ordinary professions, and all those careers which are self- 
paying, and which could therefore only be supported by 
way of endowment." 

But Pattison is careful not to rest his case on histo- 
rical grounds alone : " I niake no claim for the restoration 
of what once was, and has ceased to be, merely because it 
once was. I only seek to have the real issue clearly 
brought out before debate on University Reform is the 
order of the day. No questions of detail can be entered 
on, or particular applications of funds determined, till we 
have settled the relative claims of Education v. Science." 
The origin of the Oxford Colleges is then gone into to 
show " the difference between an endowment for science 
and an endowment for education." * 

Having shown how Oxford became a school, instead 
of a place of learning, he continues : — " When we adopt, 
and acquiesce in, this view of ourselves, we cannot 
complain if the public take us at our own valuation. If 
you are a school, the public not unnaturally argues that 
you are a very costly school. All those extensive build- 
ings, those magnificent endowments, all those Canons, 
Heads, Professors, Fellows, Tutors, to educate some 1700 
pupils ! . . Certainly the Oxford B.A. ought to be the 
most finished specimen of education in the world, if cost 
of production is the measure of value. £120,000 a year 
applied as prize-money or bonus distributable among 
Scholars, and another £50,000 a year spent on Teachers 
and Masters out of endowments, besides nearly another 
£50,000 levied in fees by Tutors, private and public. . . 
It has been determined that we are a school, and that 
we shall be nothing else. Tried by this standard, the 
public will discover two facts — 1st, That we are not the 
right sort of school for its purposes ; 2nd, That such a 
school as it wants could be conducted for probably a 
fourth of the cost, and that the other three-fourths of the 
endowment are superfluous." 2 

A forecast is then made of the direction which reform, 
under these circumstances, is likely to take. " It is not 
desired to destroy us but to make us useful. If the 
public were to take us in hand now, it would no doubt 

l lb. p. 121. 2 lb. pp. 135, 136. 



1856—1871. 177 

try to set up a school of liberal education for its youth, 
in which the measure of attainment would be what will 
get him on in life. And the measure of life would be an 
empirical one, — not life as it might be, but life as it is. 
Thus the type of our middle-class, such as it now is, 
would be perpetuated. Education, instead of an elevating 
influence, would become, as in China, the stamp of a 
uniform pattern. At the same time, it is probable that 
the first result of such a principle of reform would be an 
increased efficiency of Oxford as a school. We should 
have a varied staff of masters, under whom every sort 
of accomplishment might be acquired in little time, or 
at little cost, and youth prepared to pass unnumbered 
competitive examinations in any subject. The hive 
would be purified; the drones would be driven out. The 
danger on which the Times dwells, that we are getting 
to know too much, and to do too little, would be abated. 
Every one would be doing a day's work, and receiving a 
salary in proportion." ■ 

This is certainly the direction in which things have 
moved at Cambridge, though we have not reached 
the happy state described in the last sentence. But 
Pattison held such seeming progress to be a " catas- 
trophe," and asks eagerly, Can we do anything towards 
averting it? His reply is : " There remains only one thing 
to be tried : — we must engage in a grapple with public 
opinion, and endeavour to graft upon it, by discussion 
and by the reason of the thing, an idea of the purposes 
and the possibilities of a University, which is at present 
wanting alike to its conception, and to our practice. We 
must do nothing less than ask that the College endow- 
ments be restored to their original purpose — that of the 
promotion of science and learning." 2 

Next comes a series of reasons to show that this is 
not a Quixotic and hopeless proposal. 

1. It is not a question of a new tax to be levied. The 
money is already there. 

2. The mode of its present expenditure is not 
merely useless, but actually hurtful. " The endowments 
of schools and Colleges diminish the necessity of 

i lb. p. 138. 2 lb. p. 139. 



178 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

application in the teachers, their subsistence being 
secured by a fund, independent of their success and 
reputation in their profession." 1 

3. The clear ground ought to be taken " that the 
highest form of education is culture for culture's sake. It 
must stand not in opposition to professional life, but 
above it. The energy of a secular success is one only of 
the conditions of moral life, and not the whole of it. 
Refinement, if not actually a subtraction from public 
energy, is not a basis for it. Education is to be a 
preparation for life. Be it so. But then life is not all 
fighting. When we shall dare to say these things, and 
can show an education which, while it fits for the struggle, 
yet leads up to a view of life which is above the struggle, 
our position will not be confused by a cross issue, we 
shall not be coming before the world on false pretences." 2 

4. " It is ignorance, and not ill-will, that directs the 
popular discussions on the subject of the highest 
education. Men in general cannot imagine what they 
have seen no example of. To expect that the public should 
at once admit the idea, of the Universities becoming the 
intellectual and educational metropolis of the country, 
would be quite unreasonable." 

Supposing, then, this principle of University Reform to 
be granted, "the question arises, What form must the 
institution assume to give it a scope and influence proper 
to its time ? Three conditions of the success of such a 
body may be laid down : — (1) It must be organised ; (2) The 
persons composing it must be appointed for eminent 
merit, and not for other considerations ; (3) There must 
be security taken that when appointed they devote 
themselves to the promotion of knowledge, and not 
engage in other pursuits or subside into indifference." 3 

1. It must be an organisation of science. College 
funds might be spent in giving pensions to men of 
science known to be engaged in independent researches. 
But isolated life-pensions are not to be compared with au 
institution organised for perpetual succession. All the 
advantages of the spirit of association may probably be 
secured without a common domestic life. " The collegium, 

l lb. p. 142. 2 lb. pp. 145, 146. 3 lb. p. 155. 



1856—1871. 179 

the incorporated society, having a common purse and 
purpose, is still required ; but the College, in the modern 
sense of the building, is not always fitted to be the home 
of the individual members of the corporation, who must 
be free to marry. In some instances the existing College 
buildings might be appropriated for the residence of the 
future married Fellows. This would especially be desirable 
in the case of those foundations which were affected to 
the cultivation of particular studies. If it were proposed, 
e.g. to amalgamate Merton with Corpus Christi College, 
and to dedicate the united College to the study of Biology, 
Chemistry, and the allied branches, the buildings might 
in this case be wholly appropriated to the use of the 
families of the Fellows. In other cases, where no such 
special dedication took place, a College might remain 
fitted up in separate chambers as at present, and be let as 
lodging to junior students." ' 

2. " A place in a reformed College will be much more 
worth having than a Fellowship is now, and it will be of 
greater public concern that it should be properly filled. 
The question of appointment resolves itself into two : — 
(1) Who is to appoint? (2-) What test of merit is the 
appointing officer to employ? The present method of 
co-optation will no longer be applicable. An examination 
test is not to be thought of. . . There remains but one 
possible pattern on which a University, as an establish- 
ment for science, can be constructed, and that is the 
graduated Professoriate. This is sometimes called the 
German type. . . The German University is an associa- 
tion of men of learning and science under the title of 
Professors. The position created for them is such as to 
place them under the most powerful inducements to 
devote their whole mind and energies to the cultivation of 
some special branch of knowledge. . . In proposing the 
German University as the model to which we must look 
in making any alterations in our own, I wish to confine 
Jiyself entirely to this single point of view — viz. of a 
central association of men of science. . . What I wish 
to contend is, that the Professor of a modern University 
ought to regard himself primarily as a learner, and a 

i lb. pp. 156, 157. 



180 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

teacher only secondarily. His first obligation is to the 
Faculty he represents; he must consider that he is there 
on his own account, and not for the sake of his pupils. 
The pupils, indeed, are useful to him, as urging him to 
activity of mind, to clearness of expression, to definiteness 
of conception, to be perpetually turning over and verifying 
the thoughts and truths which occupy him. 

" But we must go further than this : Even merely to 
be efficient as teacher, the University teacher must hold 
up to himself a higher standard of attainment than the 
possession of so much as has to be communicated to the 
pupil. . . No teacher who is a teacher only, and not 
himself a daily student, who does not speak from the love 
and faith of a habitual intuition, can be competent to 
treat any of the higher parts of any moral or speculative 
science. . . . Our weakness of late years has been that 
we have not felt this ; — we have known no higher level of 
knowledge than so much as sufficed for teaching. Hence 
education among us has sunk into a trade, and, like 
trading sophists, we have not cared to keep on hand a 
larger stock than we could dispose of in the season. Our 
Faculties have dried up r have become dissociated from 
professional practice at one end, and from scientific 
investigation at the other, and degrees in them have lost 
all value but a social one. . . It is because our life here 
is wanting in scientific dignity, in intellectual purpose, in 
the ennobling influence of the pursuit of knowledge, that 
our action upon the young is so feeble. The trading 
teacher, whatever disguise he may assume — whether he 
call himself Professor or Tutor— is the mere servant of 
his young master. But true education is the moulding 
of the mind ancf character of the rising generation by 
the generation that now is. We cannot communicate 
^hat which we have not got. To make others anything 
we must first be it ourselves." ' 

Pattison urges these considerations again and again. 
"It cannot be repeated too often that the drift of these 
' Suggestions' is the conversion, or restoration of College 
endowments to the maintenance of a professional class 
of learned and scientific men." And again : " In order to 



i lb. pp. 157-167. 



1856—1871. 181 

make Oxford a seat of education, it must first be made 
a seat of science and learning. All attempts to stimu- 
late its teaching activity, without adding to its solid 
possession of the field of science, will only feed the 
unwholesome system of examination which is now under- 
mining the educational value of the work we do. . . 
The Professor-Fellow is to teach, but his business is 
to learn, not to teach. 1 . . Not to enlarge the 
sciences, or to heap up libraries, is our object, but to 
maintain through successive generations an order of 
minds, in each of the great departments of human 
inquiry, cultivated to the utmost point which their 
powers admit of." 2 

He adds : " It may be necessary to guard the sug- 
gestion of this principle against misconception on 
another side. The University is to be an association of 
men of science. But it is not for the sake of science 
that they are associated. Whether or no the State 
should patronise science, or promote discovery, is another 
question. Even if it should, a University is not the 
organ for this purpose. A Professoriate has for its duty 
to maintain, cultivate, and diffuse extant knowledge. 
This is an every-day function which should not be con- 
founded with the very exceptional pursuit of prosecuting 
researches or conducting experiments with a view to 
new discoveries. The Professoriate is ' to know what 
is known and definitely acquired for humanity on the 
most important human concerns.' " 3 

Outline of a Scheme. 
Pattison now proceeds to outline his scheme more 
definitely. 4 His University is one where no branch of 
human knowledge is excluded, but where every subject 
which it is for the interest of the community to have 
preserved and diffused, is professed. The corrective to 
the seeming infinity of this cadre is supplied by the old 
classification of Faculties. These are : — 

Theology. 

Law. 

Medicine. 

Classics. 

l lb. p. 198. 2 lb. p. 227. 3 pp. 171, 172. 4 lb. p. 173. 



182 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Philology and Language. 

Historical and Moral Sciences. 

Mathematical and Physical Sciences. 
" Each of these faculties will be organised as a deliberative 
body on its own arrangements, and will recommend 
from time to time such modifications in the material 
and number of its Professorships as occasion may require." 
The collective Professors of each Faculty, whether asso- 
ciated in one or more Colleges, would form a General 
Board or Collegium, competent to make, subject to the 
organic statute, 1 from time to time, regulations for the 
conduct of the studies, lectures, and examinations in 
their Faculty. The senior Professor, as Dean of the 
Faculty, would be chairman of the Board. ' 2 

Pattison then examines the above Faculties in suc- 
cession; but as his book is confined to University objects, 
he makes no suggestion about Theology, because he is 
here on ground which is not purely academical. 

The Faculty of Law also presents difficulties. " Legal 
education has been wholly withdrawn from the English 
Universities. . . Whatever the University may be able 
to do in the way of direct preparation of the legal 
practitioners must necessarily be concerted with the 
Inns of Court. . . Ten or twelve Professor-Fellows of 
recognised eminence in various departments, incorporated 
in a Law-College, would give a very different aspect to 
the question of a University law-degree as a qualification 
for a call to the Bar. A good beginning has already been 
made at All Souls." 3 

"For an endowment which is to sustain and encourage 
Historical Studies we must contemplate a much larger 
application of our Fellowship fund. . . Nor can a 
nation, which at this moment conducts and reaps the 
profit of the commerce of the world, think that one Pro- 
fessor of Political Economy is a sufficient representation 
of those vast and important subjects. The phenomena of 
capital and labour, of currency and exchange, not only 

i The reference is to p. 28, where it is recommended that the whole 
of the department " Studies and Examinations " should be placed under a 
special Delegacy, or Board, and an organic statute passed, denning the 
competency of this Board. 

2 pp. 173-175. 3 lb. pp. 178-184. 






1856—1871. 183 

involve practical questions of the highest moment, but 
questions which even the public see cannot be elucidated 
without science and theory. It is impossible, without an 
apprehension of the laws of these phenomena, to form any 
adequate conception of the world we live in. We can no 
more understand the body politic and its history without 
political economy than we can understand the natural 
body without physiology." 1 Oriel and Queen's are sug- 
gested as the History Colleges, and as a home for Moral 
and Mental Science ; Corpus and Merton, as already sug- 
gested, might furnish a home for the Biological Sciences; 
and the splendid endowments of Magdalen might go to 
the Mathematical and Experimental Sciences. 

" As for the Faculty of Arts, in the special University 
sense, there must be at least three Colleges, or incor- 
porated, endowed, bodies of Professors in it : — 

1. A College of Classical Studies. 

2. A College of Comparative Philology and the 

Science of Language. 

3. A College of the Theory and History of Art. 2 
"An endowed Art-College might provide for (say) four 

Professors: Two, historical, dealing with — (1) Classical 
Archaeology, Asiatic, Egyptian, &c, Art; (2) The period 
from the revival of Art to modern times. Two, of the 
Science and ^Esthetic, dealing with — (1) Painting and 
Sculpture, Theory of Composition, Chiaroscuro, Style, &c. ; 
(2) Architecture, Mechanics, Proportion, Balance, &c." 8 

The proper income of the Professor-Fellow, and the 
best methods of appointing him, are then discussed, but 
these need not be further gone into. As a guarantee 
against the besetting danger of endowments — mental 
stagnation and apathy — a graduated system of promotion 
is recommended, or a four-fold scale rising in value : — 

1. Tutors. 

2. Lecturers. 

3. Professors. 

4. Senior Fellows (or Heads). 4 
Pattison then passes to 

Sec. 6. — Of the Studies Preliminary to the Degree. 
Here he necessarily touches on the principles of 
education, a vast subject which lies outside University 

i lb. pp. 185, 186. 2 lb. p. 193. 3 p. 196. 4 lb. p. 210. 



184 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Reform proper. Omitting reference to this topic, it may 
be noted that the writer advocates a Special Delegacy or 
Board of Examinations, on the system of representing 
all the branches of study admitted in the University. 1 
The Pass Examinations. 

As to the distinction between " Pass " and " Class," 
i.e. the distinction between an Ordinary Degree and an 
Honours Degree, Pattison declares the " Pass " to be " a 
nullity " ; and adds : " the Honour-students are the only 
students who are undergoing any educational process, 
which it can be considered as a function of a University 
either to impart or to exact ; the only students who are 
at all within the scope of the scientific apparatus and 
arrangements of an academical body." 2 In those days the 
" Pass " men were 70 per cent, of the whole number of the 
students at Oxford and the " Class " men only 30 per cent. 
Pattison would have made short and speedy work of the 
" Pass " men. He writes : " Let Oxford once resume its 
higher functions, let it become the home of science and the 
representative of the best learning of the time, and what 
is now called a pass-degree will be seen at once to be an 
incongruity. . . Let us once realise our lofty calling, 
and we shall find that we have quite enough to do in 
maintaining and adorning the vast structure of human 
knowledge to have time to occupy ourselves in the incul- 
cation of the rudiments. . . The arrangement, then, at 
which we should aim is, that the University should cease 
the pass-business altogether." 3 

The Examinations for Honours. 

" The compulsory examination and the Pass Degree 
being supposed abolished, and a voluntary examination 
outside the University for youths under eighteen substi- 
tuted for it, the next step follows as of course. The 
present standard of honours must become the qualifica- 
tion for the degree. The B.A. is superfluous and may be 
dropped. The M.A. degree may be taken at the end of 
three years residence by all whose names appear in any of 
the four classes in any of the schools. Residence must be 
at all costs preserved as a qualification." 4 

1 lb. p. 229, 2 lb. p. 230. 3 lb. pp. 236-238. 

4 lb. p. 243. 



1856- 1871. 185 

"Examination must be restored to its proper place, 
and that is one of subordination to the curriculum of 
study, whatever that curriculum may be. Instead of, as 
now, the examination regulating the student's preparation, 
and the examiner being supreme over the teacher, the 
position should be reversed. The examination should 
follow the course of study, arranged from time to time 
among the Professors of each faculty organised into a 
College of studies for that purpose." 1 

" Experience and reason seem to be both united in 
favour of the ' voluntary principle ' as an indispensable 
condition of the higher education. But all liberty must 
be realised through law. We offer the degree, but on 
conditions. We exact residence ; we test proficiency by 
examination. May we not go further, and prescribe a 
curriculum of lectures ? I think we may, if such a condi- 
tion is not arbitrary, but is founded in the nature of the 
case. . . A degree will be offered as a prize to the 
student on two conditions : — (1) That he has gone through 
a defined curriculum of study ; (2) That he has done so 
with attention and profit. The courses of lectures delivered 
by the public teachers will henceforth be the centre of the 
system. When the teacherships are filled by men of real 
knowledge, and who are imbued with the idea of science, 
the teacher will no longer condescend to be guided in what 
he shall say by an Examination in prospect. The trade 
of the sophist will be gone when examination in fixed 
text-books is abolished." 2 

Inter-Collegiate instruction (not then existing, but 
since established at both Universities), was the necessary 
corollary of such a scheme. " Let the scholar be free to 
select his teachers, and we need not anticipate any 
difficulty in getting the candidates for Honours to submit 
to a prescribed order of the subjects taught. . . It is a 
chief business of the University to lay down correct lines 
of study ; from the vast mass of all that may be learned 
and may be taught, to select what should be taught and 
learned." 8 



i lb. pp. 248-249. a lb. pp. 253, 254. 

3 lb. pp. 255, 258. 



186 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

The Conflict of Studies. 
" The existing system of Oxford education is an 
attempt at an adjustment between two conflicting 
claims. The conflict of claims is between the general 
and the special. Every man has to earn his 
bread, and is also a member of civil society, a 
participant in common humanity, is a soul capable 
of a development or perfection of its own, and so may 
be the subject of a general or humane training and 
accomplishment. The problem is to combine specialty 
of function with generality of culture. In the last 
generation— i.e. thirty years ago, the Oxford curriculum 
was wholly liberal, or general. . . After a long struggle 
with opinion we had to give way. In 1850 two new 
Schools — that of Law and History and that of Physical 
Science — succeeded in establishing themselves, but in a 
subordinate position to the School of Classics. Fifteen 
years more (1865), and the new Schools had thrust aside 
the once supreme Classics, and become alone a qualifi- 
cation for a degree. Classics may now be dropped 
entirely at Moderations. This is the adjustment between 
the general and the special. . . But I am sure we 
shall not long rest content with the clumsy adjustment 
of the problem which we patched up two years ago. . . 
The steps which we have already taken are in a right 
direction, but to make them safe we must go on. . . 
What is meant by saying that the steps have been in 
a right direction is, that the recognition of special 
studies as qualification for a degree is in conformity 
with the true principle of University education. . 
No one will dispute that, in the development of the 
mind, there comes an epoch where a discursive ranging 
from province to province of information must give 
way to the inverse process of concentrating the energies 
of the intellect in undivided intensity upon some one 
object. The necessity for so doing is forced upon most 
men by the external pressure of a profession. . . The 
division of labour is the law of mental, no less than of 
manufacturing, production. . . The only point that 
can be questioned is, Ought this change to be post- 
poned till after education is finished'? Can the higher 
education be completed by general processes? Can 



1856—1871. 187 

intellect be fully formed by formal discipline without 
special knowledge? The old University system answered 
the question in the negative. The practice of Oxford, 
for the last three centuries, since the introduction 
of the Classics as the instrument of education, has 
been founded on the opposite theory. It is essential 
to the revival of the University that it should recur to 
the older system. The principle of the old University 
system was a combination of the general and the 
special. . . The proposal made in the first part of 
these ' Suggestions,' for the application of the College 
endowments, was a proposal for the revival of faculty, 
or special studies. . . The principle I am now con- 
tending for goes further still in the direction of special- 
ising study. I am contending for the introduction 
of definite, or faculty, studies at an earlier period of 
the curriculum and for all students. . . The neces- 
sity for founding the higher education on faculty studies 
lies in the reason of the thing, and not in the weight of 
authority or the force of precedent. The higher educa- 
tion must take hold of the highest mental faculty and 
form and develop it. This faculty is the scientific reason 
in its perfect form. . . The imagination and the taste ; 
the employment and discernment of language ; the percep- 
tion of beauty by the eye ; to speak, to write, to argue, to 
reason ; — all these are capacities or accomplishments to 
be improved, or formed by education at some period. 
But all these form only a superficial mental character, if 
the great work of education, the establishment of an 
exact habit of judgment, of the philosophical intellect 
has not been achieved. . . The scientific habit can only 
be educed by setting the understanding to investigate for 
itself the laws of some one chief department, or division 
of objects. It is not the matters known that make science, 
but the mode of knowing." At the same time there 
is a qualification. " The higher education, as the portal 
through which the boy is to enter upon the duties of the 
man, must conform in its arrangements to those of the 
social system to which he belongs; . . it must adapt 
itself to the requirements of daily existence. . . There 
is no reason why every class of vocation in which intelli- 
gence and refinement are applicable, and in which a 



188 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 

career of prosperity is opened to the practitioner, should 
not have a corresponding " Faculty " arranged for it 
in the University, where an appropriate training — not 
practical and professional, but theoretical and scientific — 
might be had. Why should commerce and industry 
choose to remain under the stigma which the feudal 
system branded upon them, as base employments, which 
necessarily excluded from the education which was 
reserved for the territorial seigneur and the cleric ? . . 
What the re-arrangement of the faculties should be, and 
of the schools and courses leading up to their respective 
degrees, is matter which will require profound delibera- 
tion by special committees. Nor can it well be arranged 
by ourselves without the advice and co-operation of the 
Inns of Court, the Medical Council, the Heads of the 
Government Offices, and other chief interests and occupa- 
tions, which will in future come in for their share of 
liberal training." 1 

Pattison discussing the question of the division of 
time at Oxford between general and special studies, 
says : " Let school exercises — i.e. general education — 
terminate at Moderations. Let this examination be 
placed at the end of the first year from Matriculation. 
That passed, let the student declare his Faculty, and 
commence his special, or scientific, studies. These are 
to be according to a prescribed curriculum, for each 
Faculty separately, to be spread over two years and 
terminated by the Degree. . . As I would remove Logic 
and Philology from Moderations, and make that examina- 
tion an examination purely in scholarship, I would make 
the final examination for a degree in the Arts Faculty 
wholly scientific." 2 There follows a detailed criticism on 
" Greats " as they then were. 

Incidentally Pattison makes a strong plea for the 
training of teachers by the University. 3 He is also in 
favour of lengthening the terms. " Instead of three terms 
of residence in the year, I would have only two. The first 
should begin 10th October and end 23rd December. The 
second should begin 14th January and end 1st June. 

i lb. pp. 258-268. 2 lb. p. 311. 

3 lb. p. 287. 



1856—1871. 189 

The examinations should be held once a year, in the 
month of May." 1 Finally we come to the 

Summary of Arrangement of Studies. 

" A student would come up at once, without previous 
notice, and matriculate. All Matriculations are in Octor 
ber. He would inscribe his name on the register of the 
University, and not on the books of any College. All that 
would be necessary for this purpose would be that he 
should be presented at the Registry Office by an M.A. 
whose own name was on the roll of 'Tutors' — i.e. the 
lowest or junior grade of University teachers. There is 
no Matriculation examination, no Responsions, and no 
1 Pass ' examinations or lectures. The Tutor would give 
what instruction he thought fit, and require his pupils' 
attendance at any courses of Professors' Lectures he 
judged expedient. 

" The student would lodge where he liked. If he chose 
to rent a set of rooms in any College, or if he obtained a 
Scholarship attached to any College, he would have, of 
course, to comply with such regulations as to hours, etc., 
as the College thought good to make. Outside College 
walls he would be amenable to the disciplinal regulations 
of the University and the directions of his Tutor. 

" If he be a candidate for a degree, and for honours — 
which are the same thing — he must attend public lectures 
in such sequence as shall be from time to time directed 
by each of the Faculty Boards. The first University test 
he will encounter will be Moderations. There will be 
no limit of age or standing imposed on candidates for 
Moderations. But it would be usual to pass the Modera- 
tion-school at the end of the first year of residence — i.e. in 
the May following the October in which he matriculated. 
But there would be nothing to prevent any young man 
from offering himself for this examination before Matricu- 
lation. If he passed it, he would not thereby reduce the 
three years of his attendance on lectures to two, but he 
would gain the advantage of having got a mere 'pre- 
liminary ' examination out of the way, and of getting 
three years' scientific instruction instead of only two. In 
Moderations there would be (at least) two schools : (1) 

l 16. p. 315. 



190 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Classical ; (2) Mathematical and Physical. Candidates to 
make their option between the Classical and the Mathe- 
matical School. . . 

"Having, after Moderations, chosen his Faculty, he 
must attend the courses of lectures in that faculty in the 
order prescribed by its Boards of Studies. Any other 
lectures besides these he is free to attend if he likes. If 
he intends to become a professional teacher, in or out of 
the University, his Tutor will recommend him to inscribe 
his name in the ' Philological Seminary.' These courses 
last two years. At the end of two years from Modera- 
tions he presents himself in the school of his Faculty for 
examination for the first degree. The faculties are : — 
Theology. 
Law, with two sub-faculties : 

1. History. 

2. Moral and Social Science. 
Medicine. 

Mathematics and Physics, in two sub-divisions : 

1. Chemical and Biological Sciences. 

2. Natural Philosophy. 

Language and Literature, in three sub-divisions : 

1. Comparative Philology and Science of 

Language. 

2. Classics. 

3. Theory and Archaeology of Art. 
Civil Engineering, Architecture, etc. 

" The students who pass the examination which is 
instituted upon the courses will be entitled to the first 
degree. This degree confers the title of ' Master ' and all 
the privileges and franchises attaching at present to a 
' Member of Convocation.' 

" The second degree confers the title of Doctor of the 
Faculty to which the graduate belongs, but is only for those 
who design the practice of one of the professions. It is 
conferred by the University, but requires, besides the 
previous attainment of the degree of ' Master ' in the 
Faculty, the performance of such exercises or conditions 
as the authorities of the profession may impose. . . The 
Master's degree is, alone, to qualify for the rank of Tutor. 
But before the ' Tutor ' can be promoted to be ' Lecturer ' 
in his Faculty, a further test might perhaps be applied. 



1856—1871. 191 

At all events, attendance in the Philological Seminary 
would be required. . . As soon as the University 
teachers shall be in a position to give instruction which 
is in itself valuable, we shall not grudge to admit all who 
will, freely to it, without exacting from them that they 
shall be candidates for a degree." 1 

Such were Pattison's chief ideas on University Reform. 
In part they relate to machinery, and to the problem of 
organisation, but in the main, as he himself put it in his 
" Conclusion,*' they amount to nothing less than " a 
change in the aims and objects of Oxford." In other words, 
the author of them does not set before us a scheme 
capable of being carried out then and there, but sketches 
an ideal plan, embodying, as he put it, "a conception, 
which cannot be imported into Oxford from without, 
either by public opinion or the Legislature, because 
neither the public nor the Legislature can give an idea 
or a sentiment which they do not themselves possess. 
The idea, however, exists in germ in the University itself. 
It is sure to grow and develop itself under favourable 
influences. All that the Legislature can do is to create 
the conditions, or to remove the obstructions." 2 

Another book of importance to the University 
reformer was published in this same year, 1868, — Professor 
Goldwin Smith's " Reorganisation of the University of 
Oxford." It is comparatively brief, but it contains much 
that is suggestive and informing. Goldwin Smith 
assumes, to start with, that the direct function of a 
University in the present day is education, and that 
educational duties ought to be attached to all emoluments. 
He will have nothing to do with Mark Pattison's ideal. 
" It appears to me that the expenditure of public money 
in sinecures for the benefit of persons professedly 
devoted to learning and science has been decisively 
condemned by experience. . . Experience seems to 
show that the best way in which the University can 
promote learning and advance science is by allowing its 
teachers, and especially the holders of its great Pro- 
fessorial chairs, a liberal margin for private study ; by 
this, by keeping its libraries and scientific apparatus in 

1 lb. pp. 317-322. 2 lb. p. 227. 



192 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 

full efficiency and 'opening them as liberally as possible, 
by assisting through its Press in the publication of 
learned works which an ordinary publisher would not 
undertake, and by making the best use of its power of 
conferring literary and scientific honours." 1 And again, 
" in the same way the question whether particular Colleges 
shall devote themselves, wholly or principally, to par- 
ticular studies, must be settled by the course of events ; 
to canton the Colleges out at present among the different 
studies would be chemerical." 2 

In his suggestions Goldwin Smith takes first the 
questions affecting the Colleges internally. 

He is against the existing Fellowship System, and 
would divide the Fellowships into two classes—" Teacher 
Fellowships and Prize Fellowships ; the former class, 
with the present or increased incomes, bound to strict 
residence and the performance of educational duties; the 
latter class, with reduced incomes, but without obligation 
to reside or other compulsory duty." College government 
would be vested entirely in the Teaching Fellows. The 
Prize Fellows would be chosen by examination ; but the 
Teacher Fellows by educational qualifications without 
limit in respect of age ; so that the Colleges and the 
University would no longer be confined in their choice of 
teachers to those who had won a Fellowship immediately 
after taking the B.A. degree, to the exclusion of all whose 
educational powers may have been later developed. 

As to the Prize Fellows, they should be elected only 
for a term of years. 

" I would maintain students only during the educa- 
tional course, including in that term the full period of 
professional as well as of liberal study, whether completed 
at Oxford, or, with the sanction of the University, else- 
where." 3 

As for the Fellows forming the College staff, " pro- 
vision ought to be made for its residence under the 
conditions of modern and domestic life in houses within 
or adjoining the College." i 

" The Headships ought now to have work assigned 
them suitable to the present circumstances and functions 

l Reorganisation, pp. 1, 4. 2 lb. pp. 23, 24. 3 lb. p. 16. ** lb. p. 17. 



1856—1871. 193 

of the Colleges, i.e. the superintendence of moral dis- 
cipline, and a share in the work of education. 

" The time of persons devoted to education ought not 
to be spent in the management of estates. , . It would, 
in truth, be a good thing for the Colleges if their property 
were in the funds. . . It is in the direction, not so 
much of the lowering of charges as of improved economic 
machinery, that the economic reform of the Colleges may 
be hopefully pursued." ' 

"It seems to be generally acknowledged that the 
system under which each College attempts to be a 
University in itself must be abandoned, and that the 
Colleges must combine among themselves, and with the 
University Professoriate, for the purposes of instruction. 
. . The functions of the Tutor proper, that is, the 
personal superintendence of students, should be separated 
from those of the Lecturers ; and the Lecturers should 
lecture, not to the College, but to the University, giving 
public notice of their courses like the Professors. The 
present Tutorial Fund should at the same time be divided; 
a portion paid to the Tutors, and the rest, through the 
College, to such Lecturers as the student may attend. 
The College may thus retain all desirable control over the 
instruction of its undergraduates. The position and 
prospects of College Lecturers themselves would obviously 
be greatly improved by the change." 2 

The exact relations between the Professors and the 
College Lecturers cannot be determined beforehand : they 
will be settled among the Professors and Lecturers 
themselves, as experience may dictate. If instruction is 
reorganised on a University basis, the University Pro- 
fessor ought, in all cases, to have the first claim on the 
attendance of pupils; but otherwise the arrangements 
will probably vary in the different departments. Classics 
or Mathematics can be taught in a College Lecture-room, 
but Natural Science can only be taught in the Labora- 
tories and Anatomy Schools of the University. In the 
same way the question whether particular Colleges shall 
devote themselves, wholly or principally, to particular 
studies, must be settled by the course of events : to canton 

i lb. pp. 19, 20. 2 lb. p. 21. 



194 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

the Colleges out at present among the different studies is 
chimerical ; it would imply a knowledge of the future of 
learning and science to which nobody, especially at a 
moment of critical transition, can pretend." ' 

" Shall we make the University again a place of 
professional study, or of study preliminary to professions, 
as well as a place of liberal education ? In other words, 
shall we revive the Faculties ? The analogy of all the 
Universities of other countries points to an answer in the 
affirmative. . . The more practical parts of Law would 
still have to be learnt in London Chambers ; the more 
practical parts of Medicine in London Hospitals. The 
University must for this purpose enter into alliance 
with the Inns of Courts and the Hospitals, and recognise 
their certificates as part qualifications for the legal 
and medical degrees. . . With the Faculties, their old 
system of self-government should be revived, and they 
should be allowed, subject to the general legislation of 
the University, to regulate their own studies." 2 

" I must concur in the opinion that the ' Pass ' 
Examinations ought to cease ; and that men who are 
unable, with reasonable industry, to reach the standard 
required for the lowest class in the Honour lists, ought not 
to be brought to the University." 3 

" The Entrance Examination ought to be in the 
hands of the University, not only to secure the exclusion 
of men unprepared for Academical studies, . . but also 
to put the requisite pressure on the public schools." 4 

" That the Legislative Assembly of the University 
should be rightly constituted is a matter of the most 
vital importance. Upon this depends the fusion of the 
Colleges into a University, and their power of acting 
together for the common good. . . The most indis- 
pensable, though perhaps the most difficult reform, is to 
set the intelligent and responsible government of the 
University free from the unintelligent and irresponsible 
interference of the non-Academical Convocation. The 
power of the non-residents is a usurpation ; and it is not 
only a great anomaly, but a great evil. . . The non- 
Academical element ought to be removed from Congre- 

l lb. pp. 23, 24. 2 J6. pp. 28, 29, 30. 3 lb. p 35. * lb. p. 36. 



1856—1871. 195 

gation, and the legislature of the University made, as it 
was intended to be, purely Academical. . . If ballast, 
and a guarantee that Oxford shall not too much outrun 
public opinion, is really needed, a certain number of non- 
residents specially qualified, by having held important 
educational offices in the University or the Colleges, and 
possibly Head Masters of great Schools, might be added 
to Congregation." 1 

" The initiative Council . . . has not been success- 
ful. It has proved unable to act as a Cabinet, to shape 
any intelligible or consistent policy. . . The other 
peculiarities of our system, the preposterous rule of 
discussing a measure on one day and voting on another, 
the absence of any power of moving amendments or of 
going into Committee on the details of a measure, are 
fatal to rational legislation. . . The want of initiative 
vigour in the Council is evinced by their lazy retention of 
the fashion of legislating in bad Latin." 2 

" In an active University, the Vice-Chancellor must 
always be a functionary of the highest importance, not 
only as regards executive government, but as regards 
general initiative. . . The method of mere rotation 
among the Heads of Houses is clearly the offspring of the 
age of torpor, quite unsatisfactory at the present time." 3 

" No Delegacy or Committee can be organic without 
a proper Secretary and a Chairman of its own. . . The 
rule which makes the Vice-Chancellor ex officio Chairman 
of all Delegacies and Committees, and paralyses their 
action when he is absent (and perhaps still more when he 
is present) is too absurd, and too contrary to what 
common sense dictates elsewhere to require discussion." 4 

" That English education will for some time to come 
need the organising and guiding control of a central 
authority, can hardly be doubted ; and it seems equally 
clear that in a country governed by party, the Univer- 
sities, if made thoroughly national, would be better and 
more trustworthy depositories of such authority than the 
political government. As there are two co-equal Univer- 
sities, there would be little reason to apprehend a Procrus- 
tean despotism of education." 5 The day, however, seems 

l lb. pp. 38-40. 2 lb. pp. 40-42. 3 lb. p. 42. 

4 lb. pp. 43, 44. 5 lb. pp. 54, 56. 



196 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

still far off when Oxford and Cambridge will supersede 
the Board of Education. 

" The relations of the University and its component 
Colleges to the State also requires revision. At present 
the law is not quite certain, but it appears that though 
the University may be called to account for any technical 
breach of legality, there is no visitatorial authority to 
control the general exercise of its powers, or the general 
expenditure of its funds, in the interest of the nation. 
The Colleges have as Visitors mostly ecclesiastics. . . 
The Visitor, however, never visits in the proper sense of 
the term, nor does he in any way interfere to obviate the 
evils incident to perpetual endowments. He only hears 
appeals and interprets the Statutes. . . Everything 
seems to point to the creation of a responsible department 
of government with adequate powers for the visitation 
of endowed institutions. . . To this department of 
Government all powers now vested in the Privy Council 
or in Visitors, with regard to the amendment of Statutes 
or the appropriation of revenues, would naturally be 
transferred. . . Under an efficient system of Visitation, 
the expenditure of Academical funds for other than Aca- 
demical purposes would of course be controlled." ' 

" The action of the State should, however, be limited 
to securing the right appropriation of public property, 
and the right use of public powers. There should be no 
interference with the intellectual liberty of the University. 
On the other hand, it is obviously necessary that 
the Universities should stand perfectly clear of political 
party. Their representation in Parliament, the well- 
meant but silly gift of James I., is not only an anomaly, 
but it is, under the guise of a privilege, a real curse. In 
the case of Oxford the representation has constantly 
placed the University in a position of subserviency to a 
political faction, and of antagonism to the nation. . . 
A University which does its duty and attaches the youth 
of the upper class to it by the bond of gratitude will 
always be sufficiently, perhaps more than sufficiently,, 
represented in the House of Commons." 2 

Such were the two chief Oxford contributions during 

i lb. pp. 61-64. 2 lb. pp. 64-66. 



1856—1871. 197 

these years to the question of University Reform. The 
writers differ profoundly, yet they have much in common. 
Both desired a unified and self-governing University in 
touch with national education. Pattison had for his 
ideal an institution of the German pattern, which he 
would have secured by an amalgamation of the Colleges, 
a wholesale redistribution of their endowments, a gradu- 
ated Professoriate, and a single-chambered government. 
It is not a little amusing to find him assuring us that the 
old quarrel of University v. Colleges is a dead issue, and 
then merging these institutions so completely the one 
in the other, that promotion for the teachers lies 
through the Colleges to the University and then back 
from the University to the Colleges. Pattison's Univer- 
sity would also have claimed the student as its own 
from the outset, and have made the Colleges com- 
pletely subservient to his interests. Goldwin Smith 
keeps in closer touch with the actual, and recognises 
that the function of the University is education. He 
would consolidate the Colleges but "without loss of their 
individuality, or of the emulation of which it is the 
spring, into a University," but he leaves their exact rela- 
tions undefined ; they must be settled by the light of 
further experience. He too would make Congregation 
the sole governing body, regarding this reform as of vital 
importance, because on it "depends the fusion of the 
Colleges into a University, and their power of acting 
together for the common good." The views held in 
common by two such diverse minds ought not lightly to 
be set on one side. 



CHAPTER IX. 

THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 

The abolition of University Tests is a striking 
example of a long-delayed reform. The great Parliament 
of 1832, in the fulness of its zeal and energy made the first 
attempt to deal with the matter. On the 17th of April, 
1834, Colonel Williams moved the House of Commons to 
present an address to the King praying that subscription 
in the Universities might be abrogated except in the case 
of those persons who were proceeding to Degrees in 
Divinity. Thereupon Mr. George Wood proposed as an 
amendment that leave be given to bring in a Bill to grant 
to His Majesty's subjects generally the right of admission 
to the English Universities, and the right of equal 
eligibility to Degrees therein, notwithstanding their 
diversities of religious opinion, Degrees in Divinity alone 
excepted. On a division the amendment was carried by 
185 votes to 44, and leave was given to bring in the Bilh 
which was read a second time on the 20th of June by 321 
against 147. The third reading was carried on the 28th 
of July. Among the names of those who supported the 
measure may be found those of Mr. Secretary Spring Rice 
and Prof. Pryme, members for the Borough of Cambridge ; 
Lord John Russell, Lord Palmerston and Mr. Daniel 
O'Connell ; while Mr. W. E. Gladstone, who had entered 
Parliament in 1832, spoke in opposition on the third read- 
ing. In the House of Lords the Earl of Radnor moved 
the second reading on the 1st of August. Viscount Mel- 
bourne and Lord Brougham, then Lord Chancellor, sup- 
ported it, but the vote was Non-Contents, 187 ; Contents, 
85, and there being no Parliament Act in those days, the 
Bill was lost. Lord Holland entered a protest against 
this decision of the Peers in the following vigorous 
language : — " Excellence in the learned and liberal pro- 
fessions of Law and Medicine in no degree depends on 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 199 

religious belief; and Providence not having annexed the 
avowal of any peculiar tenets in religious matters as the 
condition of attaining human knowledge, I can discover 
no motive of prudence or duty which should induce 
human authority to impose any." 1 

The question of Tests came up again in the Parlia- 
ment of 1835. On the 11th of June of that year the Earl 
of Radnor introduced a Bill into the House of Lords 
abolishing subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles on 
Matriculation. This modest proposal was defeated by 163 
to 57 votes. 

On the 25th of May, 1843, Mr. W. D. Christie, M.P. for 
Weymouth, moved the House of Commons for leave to 
bring in a Bill to abolish certain oaths and subscriptions 
in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and to 
extend education in the Universities to persons who were 
not members of the Church of England ; but reaction had 
now set in, and on a division the motion was rejected by 
175 to 105. 

On the 19th of June, 1851, Mr. Heywood moved that 
the House of Commons should resolve itself into a Com- 
mittee to consider the religious tests imposed by the 
authority of the Crown or by Act of Parliament as a 
qualification for any civil corporate privilege in the 
Universities and Colleges of Oxford, Cambridge and 
Dublin. Whilst Mr. Milner Gibson was speaking in favour 
of the motion, the House was counted out. 

The modifications in tests effected by the University 
Acts of 1854 and 1856 have already been pointed out, and 
in this connexion the following extract will be read with 
interest. It is from the speech of the Earl of Derby, 
Chancellor of Oxford University, on the second reading of 
the Bill of 1854 in the House of Lords:— "If I thought 
that the effect of this (Bill) was in the slightest degree to 
dissociate the University and the Colleges from their close 
and intimate connexion with the Church of England — 
if I thought that it could in the slightest degree counten- 
ance any pretext on the part of the Dissenters, that for 
the purpose of accommodating their views the principles 
and the practices of the University were to be altered, I 

i Cooper, Annals, Vol. IV., pp. 584, 595. 



200 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

then should look upon this question in a very different 
light ; and as I am desirous of removing the bar to their 
admission, so I am equally sincerely, cordially and de- 
terminedly opposed to the severance of the intimate and 
close connexion between the University and the Estab- 
lished Church. . . I never will sacrifice the inestimable 
advantage of having the two Universities of Oxford and 
Cambridge as nurseries for the Church of England. . . 
I call upon Her Majesty's Ministers to declare that the 
Bill will not give to the Dissenter any control, power, or 
authority, over the discipline, teaching, or government of 
the University. I wish to learn from them how the 
degree of Bachelor of Arts is guarded in this respect, and 
I want to know further from them whether in sanction- 
ing the granting of degrees of Bachelors to Dissenters, 
they do not give them a claim to be appointed to the 
masterships of many endowed schools in this country, 
where the object of the founder in requiring the masters 
to be Bachelors of Arts was practically for the purpose 
of securing that they should be members of the Church 
of England. As for the establishment of private Halls, 
although I am ready to admit that the intermixture of 
a small and unimportant portion of Dissenters among 
the Colleges, to whose rules they were subject, might be 
unobjectionable, I am not prepared to establish in these 
private Halls congregations of Dissenting young men in 
the centre of the University, or to encourage the propa- 
gation in Oxford, either of Protestant Dissent on the one 
hand, or the inculcation of Roman Catholic opinions on 
the other." The state of public opinion which such an 
utterance denotes, amply accounts for the apathy which 
the Whig Ministers displayed towards the Nonconformist 
grievance, and the despair of such men as Mr. Bright, Mr. 
Miall and Mr. Heywood, as to the possibility of securing 
redress. 

The further efforts made after 1856 must be passed 
over very briefly. Suffice it to say that from 1864 
onwards a University Tests Bill was a " hardy annual " 
in the House of Commons. The Bill of 1867 was rejected 
by the House of Lords, as was the Bill of 1869. The 
real debate on the subject took place in 1870. On May 
23rd of that year, the Solicitor-General, Sir John Duke 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 201 

Coleridge, moved the second reading of the University 
Tests Bill. 1 The Government had now advanced to the 
j)Osition previously occupied by the more Radical members 
of the party, and had incorporated in their proposals the 
amendment moved by Mr. Fawcett to the Bill of the 
previous year, the effect of which was, that instead 
of the abolition of the tests being left to the various 
Colleges, to be adopted by them or not at their pleasure, 
those tests were abolished for them once for all by the 
power of Parliament. Mr. Spencer Walpole, one of the 
members for the University of Cambridge, moved the 
rejection of the Bill. Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice, in 
supporting it, thus summarised the facts: "Only 
after the Reformation did the fatal idea creep in of 
fastening the Universities in the strait waistcoat of 
orthodoxy. King Edward VI weeded out the Catholics, 
Queen Mary weeded them in again. Queen Elizabeth 
weeded them out a second time ; and after much vacil- 
lation, owing to the various interests which alternately 
influenced her mind, she inflicted on Oxford the Thirty- 
nine Articles and the three Articles of the 36th Canon. 
This was done at the advice of Leicester, an incompetent 
general, a more than incompetent statesman, and the 
murderer of his wife. King James inflicted the three 
Articles of the 36th Canon on Cambridge. But it was not 
till the Restoration that the Universities experienced 
their full degradation. By the Act of Uniformity of 
Charles II. it was ordered that Heads and Fellows of 
Colleges, Professors, Lecturers and Tutors should be 
required to declare their unfeigned assent and consent to 
all and everything contained and prescribed in the Book 
of Common Prayer. The century and a-half after the 
Act of Uniformity was the darkest and dreariest period in 
the history of the Universities. They became a by-word, 
not only in England but on the Continent. They were 
the home of Jacobite Toryism ; they published declara- 
tions against civil and religious liberty — on one occasion 
in such language that the declaration was ordered to be 
burnt by the hands of the common hangman, and that 
order came from the House of Lords. Of educational 



i Hansard, Parliamentary Debates, Vol. CCL, p. 1192, and following 
volumes. 



202 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

work there was little or none, and religion showed its 
presence chiefly by those libations of port wine of which 
Gibbon preserved so keen a recollection." Mr. Gladstone 
followed on the same side, agreeing with Sir Robert Peel 
that " it was impossible to admit Dissenters to education 
at the Universities without admitting them to degrees, 
that it was impossible to admit them to degrees without 
admitting them to government, and impossible to admit 
them to government without admitting them to emolu- 
ments." The first two points had been conceded ; the 
second two followed of necessity. The second reading 
was carried by 191 to 66, a majority of 125, and the third 
reading by a still larger majority. 

In the House of Lords the second reading was moved 
on July 14 by Earl de Grey and Ripon, afterwards known 
as the Marquis of Ripon. The Marquis of Salisbury met 
the proposal by a hostile amendment which was carried 
by a majority of 14, and a Select Committee was appointed 
for the purpose of inquiring into the best mode of giving 
effect thereto. This action killed the Bill for that session, 
but the discussions which had taken place materially 
shortened the proceedings in 1871. 

Mr. Gladstone, when once he had reached a position, 
never went back from it ; and though as late as 1865 he 
had opposed Mr. Goschen's Bill for the abolition of tests 
at Oxford, he was now determined that the oft-repeated 
demands of the Nonconformists should in great measure 
be granted, and he went forward without wavering. On 
February 10th, 1871, he re-introduced the Bill of the year 
before, refusing to enlarge it so as to include clerical 
Fellowships and Headships, on the ground that it was the 
duty of the Government to make one more appeal to the 
House of Lords to pass the measure which it had rejected 
the year before. Six days later the Bill was read a second 
time without a division. On February 20th it passed 
through Committee without amendment, and was read a 
third time without a division on February 23rd. This 
rapid progress showed that all parties in the Commons 
were ready for a settlement. 

The House of Lords gave the Bill a first reading on 
the same day as it passed the House of Commons. The 
real struggle was in Committee. The Marquis of Salis- 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 203 

bury, in accordance with the advice of the Select Com- 
mittee appointed the year before, proposed the following 
addition to Clause 2 : " No person shall be appointed to the 
office of Tutor, Assistant Tutor, Dean, Censor, or Lecturer 
in Divinity, in any College now subsisting in the said 
Universities, until he shall have made and subscribed the 
following Declaration in the presence of the Vice-Chan- 
cellor, that is to say : ' I A. B. do solemnly declare that 

while holding the office of I will not teach anything 

contrary to the teaching or divine authority of the Holy 
Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments.' " The noble 
Marquis declared that " the question raised by this Bill is 
not a question between Church and Dissent, but between 
Christianity and infidelity." ' Personally he and his 
friends desired that all honours and emoluments, all 
Fellowships and Scholarships should be thrown open 
without distinction to all subjects of the Queen. They 
held, however, that the office of teaching rested upon a 
very different footing to the enjoyment of emoluments, 
the rights of the pupils had to be considered, education 
must be religious, and the amendments to be proposed 
were directed mainly to the maintenance of religious 
education. The amendment was carried by 71 to 66, a 
majority of only 5, aud other amendments on the same 
lines were carried by equally narrow majorities. Mr. 
Gladstone, on the return of the Bill to the Commons, 
would have none of Lord Salisbury's " negative test," and 
declared that it was impossible to have such a test more 
unfortunately framed than that introduced by the Lords. 
The amendment was disagreed with without a division, 
as were similar amendments. The Lords did not carry 
the contest further. The motion to insist on the Salis- 
bury clause was lost by a majority of 40. After this 
vote it was useless to persevere, and the Royal Assent was 
given to the Bill on June 16th, thirty-seven years after 
Mr. Ward had made the first attempt. 



i Most political struggles generate catch-words. The catch-word 
about the abolition of University Tests was that "it was opening the 
flood-gates of infidelity." The present defenders of the last shred of 
religious tests now remaining at Oxford,— those for the Divinity Degrees, 
do not seem to have advanced very far from the position occupied by 
Lord Salisbury more than forty years ago. 



204 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

We may now turn to the text of the Act itself. The 
first paragraph of the Preamble runs as follows : — 

" Whereas it is expedient that the benefits of the 
Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and Durham, and of 1 
the Colleges and Halls now subsisting therein, as places 
of religion and learning, should be rendered freely acces- 
sible to the nation :" It is here laid down that not only 
the Universities, but the Colleges as well are henceforth i 
to be regarded as national institutions. 

The operative clause is Clause 3. It runs : " No ] 
person shall be required, upon taking, or to enable him i 
to take, any degree (other than a degree in Divinity) | 
within the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and I 
Durham, or any of them, or upon exercising or to enable 
him to exercise, any of the rights and privileges which i 
may heretofore have been, or may hereafter be, exercised I 
by graduates in the said Universities, or any of them, , 
or in any College subsisting at the time of the passing 
of this Act in any of the said Universities, or upon 
taking, or holding, or to enable him to take or hold, any 
office in any of the said Universities or any such College 
as aforesaid, or upon teaching, or to enable him to teach, , 
or upon opening, or to enable him to open, a private 
Hall or Hostel for the reception of students, to subscribe 
any article or formulary of faith, or to make any declara- 
tion, or to take any oath respecting his religious belief I 
or profession, or to attend, or abstain from attending, 
any form of public worship, or to belong to any specified I 
church, sect, or denomination ; nor shall any person be : 
compelled to attend the public worship of any church, 
sect, or denomination to which he does not belong." 

The word "office" is previously defined in Clause 2. 
as including " every Professorship other than Professor- 
ships of Divinity, every Assistant or Deputy Professor- 
ship, Praelectorship, Lectureship, Headship of a College t 
or Hall, Fellowship, Studentship, Tutorship, Scholarship! 
or Exhibition." 

The throwing open of all rights and privileges enabled j 
Nonconformists to vote as members of the Senate, and 
consequently to take their full share in the government 
of the University. Clause 3, combined with Clause 2, 
threw open all Headships, Professorships, Lectureships, 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 205 

Fellowships and Scholarships, save where a clerical 

qualification was expressly attached to them. This 

exception was effected by the saving sections of Clause 3. 

Compulsory attendance at College Chapel was also done 
; away with for those who were not members of the 

Church of England. 

This same year was rendered notable by another step 
i in advance. On October 24th, 1871, Mr. Gladstone 

addressed a letter to the Vice-Chancellors of Oxford and 
: Cambridge which began as follows : — 

" Rev. Sir, — I have the honour to acquaint you that 
I during the discussions of the current year upon the 
i University Tests Act, the advisers of the Crown made 
'known to Parliament their opinion that a complete 
i enquiry ought to be instituted, by a Commission for the 
i purpose, into the revenues and property of the two 
. Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and their intention 
: to take steps with a view to the early appointment of such 
; a Commission. 

" On the one hand it appeared to be undeniable that 

the information to be sought through such a Commission 
: would be of great interest and value to the public and to 

Parliament, as well as to the members of the two 
distinguished bodies themselves. On the other hand, the 

Government bore in mind that it had not been in the 
power of a Royal Commission of inquiry, appointed more 
than twenty years ago, to present such information in a 
complete form even at the period of their investigation ; 
while the time which has intervened must have greatly 
altered the facts of the case in a variety of material 
particulars. 

" What thus remained wanting could only be supplied 
either under the authority of a Statutory Commission, or 
through a Royal Commission, if such Royal Commission 
should enjoy the full and free assistance of the Uni- 
versities and Colleges themselves." 

Mr. Gladstone then remarked that from inquiries 
which had been made, it was thought a Royal Commission 
Avould meet the needs of the case. He continued : — 

" With regard to the scope of the inquiry which has 
been mentioned in Parliament, it ought, in our view, to 
embrace the fullest information respecting all matters of 



206 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

fact connected with the property and income either of the 
Universities themselves, or of the Colleges and Halls 
therein. In these would be included the prospects of 
increase or decrease in such property and income, and the 
statement of the uses to which they are applied. But it 
would be no part of the duty of the Commission to pass 
judgment on the present appropriation of these resources, 
or to recommend alterations in it. For a task thus 
denned, in the opinion of the Government, a single 
Commission, composed of a small number of members, 
would suffice ; and it is to be hoped that the inquiry need 
not occupy more than a moderate space of time. 

" What is requisite, however, is that the Government 
should have reasonable ground to expect such voluntary 
and general assistance from the numerous societies con- 
cerned as would warrant their relying on a process thus 
conducted for the attainment of complete results." 
Finally Mr. Gladstone asked the Vice-Chancellor to 
ascertain how such a Commission would be regarded by 
the University and the Colleges. The reply in both cases 
was that every facility and assistance would be afforded 
in order to render the inquiry effectual. 1 

On January 5, 1872, a Royal Commission was issued, 
the Commissioners being the Duke of Cleveland, Lord 
Frederick Cavendish, Lord Clinton, J. W. Strutt (after- 
wards Lord Rayleigh), W. H. Bateson, Bartholomew Price, 
and K. D. Hodgson. Mr. C. S. Roundell was appointed 
Secretary. The Commissioners presented their Report 
on July 31st, 1874. Details from it and comment on it 
are reserved for Chapter XI., which treats of the Financial 
Resources of the two Universities. 

In the Appendix to the Report will be found various 
matters of wider scope. There are here the memorials 
and other documents which show the origin of the 
University Extension Movement (pp. i.-xi.). 

There is also a memorandum addressed to Mr. 
Gladstone which runs as follows : — 

" We, the undersigned, being resident Fellows of 
Colleges and other Resident members of the University 
of Cambridge, engaged in educational work or holding 

i Report, p. 23. 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 207 

offices in the University or the Colleges, thinking it of 
the greatest importance that the Universities should 
retain the position which they occupy as the centres of 
the highest education, are of opinion that the following 
reforms would increase the educational efficiency of the 
University, and at the same time promote the advance- 
ment of science and learning. 

" I. No Fellowship should be tenable for life, except 
only when the original tenure is extended in consider- 
ation of services rendered to education, learning, or 
science, actively and directly, in connection with the 
University or the Colleges. 

" II. A permanent professional career should be as far 
as possible secured to resident educators and students, 
whether married or no(t). 

" III. Provision should be made for the association of 
the Colleges, or of some of them, for educational purposes, 
so as to secure more efficient teaching and to allow to the 
teachers more leisure for private study. 

"IV. The pecuniary and other relations subsisting 
between the University and the Colleges should be 
revised, and, if necessary, a representative Board of 
University finance should be organised. 

"We are of opinion that a scheme may be framed 
which shall deal with these questions in such a manner 
as to promote simultaneously the interests of education 
and of learning, and that any scheme by which those 
interests should be dissociated would be injurious to 
both." 

In the covering letter sent with the memorial there 
occurs the following sentence : — 

"It is universally admitted that the present regula- 
tions connected with the tenure of Fellowships are highly 
unsatisfactory. They seriously diminish the number of 
learned residents in Cambridge. They are detrimental to 
the efficiency of teaching in the University, and calcu- 
lated to deprive her of the educational services of many of 
her ablest members." 

Mr. Gladstone replied in a letter dated April 28th, 
1873, in which he says : " It gives me great pleasure to 
find supported by this authoritative judgment a proposal 
with respect to the tenure of Fellowships, the principle of 



208 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

which was included in the Oxford University Bill of 1854, 
but from which the state of Parliamentary and academic 
opinion at the time compelled the Government of Lord 
Aberdeen to withdraw." Mr. Gladstone adds that the 
time is hardly ripe for action, but assures the memorial- 
ists that the subject is one which will always command 
his warm and friendly interest. 

In January, 1874, Mr. Gladstone appealed to the 
country. At the ensuing General Election he was 
defeated, and on February 17th he resigned office. When 
therefore the Royal Commission reported on the last 
day of July, 1874, the Conservatives had for some months 
been installed in office, and by one of the ironies of 
politics it fell to them to carry out their predecessors' 
policy in the matter of University Reform. Mark 
Pattison has left us the following lively explanation of a 
unique situation as it appeared to him in 1876, the year 
before legislation actually took place. "In 1854," he 
writes, 1 " the House of Commons, after many threats and 
long hesitation, made its onslaught on the Universities, 
or rather on the Colleges. It was a fair stand-up fight 
between these wealthy and powerful societies and the 
representatives of the nation. The issue may be said to 
have been a drawn battle. The Colleges were not 
re-modelled, nor did they lose a shilling of their property. 
On the other hand, the assailant made good his claim to 
overhaul and to legislate. Everyone felt that this first 
baffled attempt was but a prelude. We are now (1876) in 
the middle of the second Punic War, and no one can fail 
to see the importance of the advantage gained by the 
attacking party in the first. In 1854 we disputed the 
right of interference, and invoked our charters and the 
sacredness of private property. This ground is no longer 
taken. The cry of ' spoliation ' is no longer raised. We 
take as a matter of course the taking away of the 
property of the Colleges and giving it to the University, 
and no one is shocked or so much as hints at ' confisca- 
tion.' . . All parties are agreed that the Colleges 
shall be wholly re-modelled. There is no fight about this. 
The struggle will be what model shall be adopted. . . 

1 Essays on the Endowment of Research, pp. 2-3, 11-15. 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 209 

What then are the causes of dissatisfaction? What 
is it that has led to the call for a new Reform Bill ? 
From what side does the present movement, which Lord 
Salisbury's Bill is intended to satisfy, come ? 

" The question is not so easy to answer as might be 
thought. I have asked over and over again, Why should 
a Conservative Government have meddled with the 
University at all ? It is not part of the Tory programme 
to promote science, to foster intelligence, to raise the level 
of education. Property, character, respectability, Church 
principle, obedience to superiors, these have been the basis 
on which Toryism has rested, these are the valuable 
qualities it has fostered, and to the production of which it 
would fain direct its education. In its adhesion to this 
programme lay the strength of Conservatism. How is it 
that it should have deserted its traditional ground, and 
taken up the policy of the Liberal party ? Twenty years 
ago the very title of ' Professor ' was odious to the Con- 
servatives, who used all their strength, and successfully* 
to prevent the employment of College funds for the 
endowment of Professorial chairs. Now in 1876, when 
the Universities were working better than they had ever 
done, when there was no public dissatisfaction, no call 
whatever for interposition, a Conservative Government 
comes down upon us with a Bill, the object of which, so 
far as we can discover its object, is to promote that very 
kind of reform which twenty years ago it employed all its 
strength to defeat — the confiscation, viz., of College pro- 
perty for the benefit of the University. . . It cannot be 
alleged that there was any pressure of opinion from 
without which called for a further University reform. 
The Bill of the present Ministry is a legacy from the 
' harassing ' legislation of their predecessors. . . Accord- 
ing to the opinion of the middle classes of England, 
Oxford is a place of education. We ourselves, i.e. the Col- 
leges, have no other conception of our vocation. Mean- 
while a vague notion was being spread that these societies, 
which existed only for education, were possessed of large 
landed or other property. The central Government 
wished to know how much ? It asked us to tell in 1851, 
but we yelled and screamed, and threw dust in the 
air, and got off telling for the moment. The question was 



210 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 

repeated in 1874, and in sterner and more determined 
tones. The howling this time was confined to the Bursars 
of the Colleges. These gentlemen were certainly hardly 
used, in being required to make laborious returns upon 
schedules quite unnecessarily complicated. But it will 
be observed that the Colleges this time showed no reluct- 
ance to produce their rent-rolls. The public, as usual, in 
the absence of information, had indulged in exaggeration. 
We paid the just penalty of having refused in 1851 to 
make any return, in being now credited with extravagant 
riches. In 1874 we were rather anxious to disabuse general 
opinion by letting it be known how moderate our incomes 
really were. 

" The return was made. It was ascertained that the 
nett income of the University and Colleges of Oxford was 
i,'400,000 a year. To combine this fact, or figure, with the 
other fact or figure that Oxford is a place for the education 
of 2,000 students, required no great powers of logic. It 
was a sum in division. Divide the pounds sterling by the 
students, and it is obvious that each undergraduate costs 
£200 a year to educate. To educate, observe ; simply 
teachers' fees; for the pupil pays himself for his board, 
lodging, all his necessaries and amusements. The 
teaching power, for 2,000 undergraduates, staff, apparatus, 
chapels, libraries, Deans, Tutors, Heads, Prize-Fellowships, 
who all exist for the sake of the undergraduate, cost 
£400,000 a year. This is a striking, not to say staggering 
result. If the lower and uneducated classes should ever 
come to an apprehension of these figures, how must they 
reason upon them ? ' This annual sum arises out of 
national property. National property belongs to us. We 
are even told by some that it was given by the founders 
to the poor students. It is all spent upon educating the 
sons of the rich.' It is certain that as information slowly 
finds its way downwards, this simple reasoning must come 
into vogue. Meanwhile, so far as the figures have been 
reflected on by the classes at present interested in the 
Universities, the conviction has arisen that there is some- 
thing wrong here. The expenses of this educational 
establishment are out of all proportion to the work done. 
We have not so much fault to find with the teaching, but 
it is too expensive. £400,000 a year for 'tuition, prizes 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 211 

and the use of the globes ' is too much. It can be done 
cheaper. 

" If this is a true description, first of the actual 
reasoning of the middle classes, and secondly of the pros- 
pective reasoning of the lower classes, it becomes intelli- 
gible why a Conservative Government should have found 
it necessary to take the initiative and endeavour to 
obviate the economic objection to Oxford. The objection 
of its extravagant cost is not the only objection that can 
be brought, but it is the only one which is urged with any 
effect, or which can be adequately apprehended by the 
middle class of an industrial community with little 
education and no culture. The sum in arithmetic — 
divide the pounds by the pupils— that is an argument by 
which 'the constituencies' are capable of being moved. 
It is an act of statesmanship to anticipate this movement, 
and to deal with ' surplus funds ' of the Colleges before 
they are seized by ignorant hands. I offer this as a con- 
jectural history of Lord Salisbury's Bill." 

When Parliament assembled on February 8th, 1876, it 
was announced in the Queen's Speech that legislation 
would be proposed relating to the Universities. Accord- 
ingly on February 24th the Marquis of Salisbury, who 
was then Secretary of State for India, rose to present 
the University of Oxford Bill. After premising that 
there were not many in the House who could remember 
the last University Bill, he continued : " It may be worth 
while, therefore, before entering on the consideration of 
another University Bill to remind your Lordships of the 
principles embodied in the Act of 1854. And what were 
they ? . . . The principal portion of the Act was 
directed to the entire reconstruction of the Government 
and legislative machinery of the University. With 
respect to that portion of the Act, I have no proposition 
to make. Another point which at the time was con- 
sidered to be of great importance was . . . that pro- 
vision in the Act which gave leave to Masters of Arts 
to set up Halls. . . The result has been that one 
Master set up a Hall, and that there are four under- 
graduates in it. That is the end of all those hopes and 
all those fears. Some twelve years afterwards the Uni- 
versity devised a plan of its own to admit the less wealthy 



212 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

classes to the training of the University. It devised 
what is known as the system of Unattached Students. 
The result which seven years' experience of that system 
enables the University to present is very remarkable. 
In 1868-9, when it commenced, the entries of under- 
graduates as Unattached Students was 53 ; and from 
that time they have gone on increasing year by year, 
so that in 1875 they were 185, which is, I think, a 
very respectable number. . . A third point in the 
Act of 1854 was the application of the revenues of the 
Colleges. In respect of that, undoubtedly, there has 
not been the same satisfaction as has been derived 
from the other points with which the Act dealt. There 
are constant complaints that the revenues of the Univer- 
sity are not spent in as useful a manner as they might 
be, and that things remain undone which might be done 
if there were a more judicious outlay of some portion of 
those revenues. This it was which led to the appoint- 
ment of the Commission presided over by the Duke of 
Cleveland, whose inquiry was to be as to the revenues 
of the Colleges as they at present exist, and as they 
might be expected to exist at a definite time. That 
Commission reported towards the close of 1874. In one 
sense it was a most satisfactory Report. It showed that 
the idea — if the idea ever existed — that the Colleges 
mismanaged their property was wholly without founda- 
tion. . . But, on the other hand, the Commissioners 
go on to notice, as one remarkable thing arising out of 
their inquiry, a point to which it would have been 
impossible not to direct the attention of Parliament. 
One point brought prominently out in the result of the 
inquiry is the great disparity between the property and 
income of the several Colleges and the number of the 
members. When that number is small the expense of 
the staff and establishment is large in proportion. And 
now let me explain why we undertook to legislate on the 
University at all. It is a work I undertook with great 
reluctance, and I do not think Her Majesty's Government 
would have entered upon it at all, if they had not felt 
that there was an absolute necessity for their so doing. 
It is not desirable, if it can be avoided, that the inter- 
ference of Parliament should be invoked, because 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 213 

such interference is calculated to disturb the studies 
of the University and to excite hopes that cannot be 
realised. But when we come to look at certain figures 
and the deductions that lay in those figures, we felt that 
it would be idle to think that Parliament could abstain 
from interfering, or that we could conscientiously 
recommend Parliament to do so. I will venture to put 
before your Lordships what I know are hostile figures. 
. . . In the first place, it is calculated that within the 
next 15 years an addition of no less than £123,000 a year 
will be made to the Collegiate revenues. . . Again, it 
is not only the prospective income of the Colleges which 
is to be regarded — we have an actual income to examine. 
Taking together the whole corporate income and tuition 
fees, but deducting money borrowed and money received 
on behalf of the University, and other necessary deduc- 
tions, it appears that the average income per under- 
graduate in all the Colleges is £203. But when we come 
from the Colleges as a whole to particular Colleges we 
have very different results. The income per undergraduate 
in all the Colleges is £203 ; but in Exeter it is only £97> 
in Trinity £96, and in Balliol £75. If University education 
were provided in all the Colleges as cheaply as at Exeter, 
there would be at present a saving annually of £165,578 ; 
as cheaply as at Trinity, there would be a saving 
annually of £167,129 ; or as cheaply as at Balliol, a saving 
annually of £197,700. With such figures before us, on the 
surface of the Report, I hold that it would be impossible 
to avoid dealing with the question. . . It may be urged 
that the Colleges individually may come and ask to 
have the necessary legislative changes. But another 
and great complaint is that, while the Colleges are 
rich, the University is poor, and you cannot expect 
that the result of an application by each College 
would be a scheme which would work economically for 
the whole. You might as well expect economy and 
good order to result from the proceedings of twenty 
different architects building a club-house, each of whom 
came forward with a plan of one room in the club-house 
to suit his own views. But where does the money go? 
The £200,000 is not thrown into the sea. AVith a great 
number of different bodies, some large and some small, of 



214 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

course the expense of the small bodies will be out of pro- 
portion to that of the large ones. The real gist of the 
whole question lies in the Fellowships, and in the giving 
nien £250 to £300 a year without any duties attached to 
the Fellowships in right of which they receive that 
amount. I do not believe that any one starting fresh in 
the matter would ever think of establishing rewards of 
that kind. . . Only in this case of Fellowships to which 
no duties are attached do you reward merit by absolute 
idleness. It is against the whole law of public life. In 
public life, if a man succeeds, you give him more import- 
ant work, but not idleness. In the Bill of 1854 the 
authors of that Bill saw the evil and endeavoured to pro- 
vide against it. They suggested that there should be 
work attached to those Fellowships. But there was great 
opposition. In the end Commissioners were appointed ; 
and the Commissioners, though they wished to make a 
fundamental alteration, did not care to make an effectual 
alteration. I am afraid they adopted a compromise main- 
taining the appearance of one system while adopting 
another. At all events it is a comfort to know that the 
University has become thoroughly alive to the evil of this 
state of things, and from it we shall meet with no 
opposition in applying such remedy as may be thought 
necessary. It seems that if all these ' idle Fellowships ' 
were to be done away with, we should save a sum 
of from £50,000 to £()0,000 or £80,000. That, under an 
improved system, could be applied to University purposes. 
There are now from 220 to 230 of these Fellowships not 
filled by any person occupying an educational office. At 
£250 per Fellow that would give a disposable sum of 
£55,000 a year. These are the monies we have got in hand. 
First I would ask what are the objects to which it is 
desirable that these revenues should be applied ? . . I 
should suggest that the recommendations of the Com- 
mittee of the Hebdomadal Council would afford a good 
indication of present requirements. The Committee 
speaks of a new library, new museums, and new schools. 
. . I think I may estimate that a capital sum amount- 
ing, on the whole, to £210,000 would be required for these 
objects. Besides this the Committee press strongly the 
necessity of increased remuneration for those who are 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 215 

engaged in academical education. There are Professors 
at £800, £600, £300, £200, and even at £100. Compare these 
annual stipends with what is paid in other departments. 
. . I do not believe that less than £1000 a-year, with a 
fair pension beside, will secure the highest talent for 
those Professorships. . . My Lords, these being the 
objects we have in view, it may be well to state what 
money we hold to be available. In the Report of the Com- 
missioners a distinction is drawn between the general 
income of the Colleges and the money held by them in 
trust. We propose to interfere very little with trusts. 
. . But beside the trust funds there would still remain a 
vast residue of revenue over which the Commissioners 
would be able to exercise control and to apply to such pur- 
poses as they thought best. . . We propose now to begin 
at the point where the Act of 1854 ended. We propose to 
provide by means of the present Bill that each College 
shall have the opportunity during some eighteen or 
twenty months after the passing of the Act of drawing 
up and of laying statutes before the Commissioners to 
be appointed under the Bill, and on such statutes receiv- 
ing the approval of the Commissioners they shall become 
law. . . All I have to do now is to show what duties 
the Commissioners will have to perform. We propose 
that in dealing with the University the Commissioners 
may make provision from time to time for affording 
further or better instruction in Art or Science; for pro- 
viding endowments for Professorships or Lectureships ; 
for erecting and endowing Professorships or Lecture- 
ships on arts or sciences not already taught in the 
University ; for providing new or improving existing 
buildings, libraries and museums, and collections and 
apparatus. The proposal with regard to the Colleges 
is somewhat similar, and also provides that College 
revenues may be applied to the maintenance and benefit 
of persons of known ability and learning, who may be 
engaged in study or research in the realms of Art and 
Science in the University." Lord Salisbury then went 
on to speak of the duty and necessity of encouraging 
research, and concluded the most radical speech he ever 
made in these words: "We feel in the present chaos 
of opinion, at a time when beliefs of all kinds and on 



216 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

all subjects appear to be loosening their hold, it is of 
especial value to give every facility to, and to take every 
opportunity of maintaining in their fullest efficiency, 
institutions which combine those dispositions of mind 
on which alone any sound and progressive culture can 
rest." 

An interesting feature of the brief discussion which 
followed was a speech by the Archbishop of Canterbury, 
who, as Dr. Tait, had been one of the leading spirits of 
the Oxford Commission of 1850. He remarked that 
" looking to the past, he could not conceal from himself 
that it was desirable that a little external pressure should 
be brought to bear upon the Universities, and that it 
would not do to trust either the Universities or the 
Colleges with the entire management of the reforms, for 
he believed that they were not an exception to the rule 
which had been found to exist everywhere, that hardly 
any corporation was capable of entirely reforming itself 
without external pressure." 1 

The second reading of the Bill was carried on March 
9th. Speaking for the Government, the Earl of Carnarvon 
remarked : " It must never be forgotten that originally at 
Oxford the University was the chief and central figure, 
but changes had occurred, and at Oxford the supremacy 
had passed into the hands of the Colleges, and in restoring 
a little of the power which originally belonged to the 
University, they were but reverting to an old idea, but 
a sound one in theory and practice." 2 The Marquis of 
Salisbury, on the other hand, on March 31st, on the 
motion to go into Committee, said plainly : " The interests 
of the Colleges would be attended to first, and those of 
the University afterwards." 

In Committee the Earl of Morley carried the following 
amendment : " The Commissioners may also, on the 
application of any two or more Colleges, make provision 
for their complete or partial union ; such application 
shall be made by at least two-thirds of the Governing 
Bodies of the said Colleges, with the consent of the 

Hansard, Parliamentary Debates, Vol. CCXXVII., pp. 791-806. 
2 lb. p. 1683. 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 217 

Visitors thereof." The Marquis of Salisbury afterwards 
embodied this amendment in a new clause, which appears 
as Clause 22 in the Act. 

Lord Carlingford was unsuccessful with the following 
clause, intended to give Oxford the same constitution as 
Mr. Gladstone intended by the Bill of 1854 : — " On and 
after the 15th day of Michaelmas Term, 1876, the 
Congregation of the University of Oxford shall be 
composed of the following persons only, the said persons 
being members of Convocation : The Chancellor, the 
High Steward, the Heads of Colleges and Halls, the 
Proctors, the Members of the Hebdomadal Council, the 
officers named in the schedule to this list annexed, the 
Professors, Lecturers and Readers of the University, the 
Public Examiners, Resident Fellows of Colleges, and all 
persons who shall be certified by the Head of any College 
or Hall to be engaged in the tuition, discipline, or 
administration of such College or Hall." 

The Bill was passed and sent to the Commons on May 
5th, and was read a second time on June 12th. 

The University of Cambridge Bill was introduced 
into the House of Commons by Mr. Spencer Walpole on 
May 16th, and was read a second time on July 6th, after 
an amendment moved by Sir Charles Dilke : " That in 
view of the large legislative powers entrusted to the 
University of Cambridge Commissioners, this House is of 
opinion that the Bill does not sufficiently declare or define 
the principles and scope of the changes which such Com- 
missioners are empowered to make in that University and 
the Colleges therein." This amendment was identical in 
terms with that which Mr. Osborne Morgan had pre- 
viously moved on the Oxford Bill. The idea which was 
in the mind of the Opposition may be expressed in one 
sentence from Sir Charles Dilke's speech : " Their com- 
plaint was, that as far as any limitations went, the Bill 
enabled the Commissioners to strip the Colleges in order 
to make a couple of bad copies of a German University." 
It is noteworthy that Sir Charles Dilke, a Cambridge man 
and a Radical, was for the Colleges against the Univer- 
sity, and that the Radical section of the Liberal Party 
agreed with him. Both Bills were withdrawn on July 31st. 

The Queen's Speech for 1877 again contained a promise 



218 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

of University legislation. This time the two Bills were 
made into one, and on February 9th Mr. Gathorne Hardy 
brought in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge 
Bill. On February 19th the Bill was read a second time 
without a division. In Committee Sir Charles Dilke 
again raised the question of University government. He 
proposed to give powers to the Commissioners " for alter- 
ing the qualifications required for membership of Congre- 
gation at Oxford, and for admission to the Electoral Roll 
of the University of Cambridge, and for limiting or 
abrogating the power of the Convocation of the University 
of Oxford and of the Senate of the University of Cam- 
bridge respectively to regulate matters relating to the 
studies of the University, and to the education given in 
it." The amendment was lost by a majority of 28. A 
long debate took place on the question of Clerical Fellow- 
ships, Mr. Goschen moving : " The Commissioners, in 
Statutes made by them for a College, shall provide that 
the entering into or being in Holy Orders shall not be the 
condition of the holding of any Headship or Fellowships." 
The Government view was that the question should be 
left to the Commissioners. The discussion drew Mr. 
Gladstone from the retirement in which he had lived 
since his defeat in 1874, and he supported Mr. Goschen, 
who was defeated by a majority of only nine. The Bill 
was read a third time on June 18th. The Lords made 
certain amendments, but an agreement between the two 
Houses was speedily reached, and the Royal Assent was 
given on August 10th. 

The Preamble of the Act runs as follows : — 
" Whereas the revenues of the Universities of Oxford 
and Cambridge are not adequate to the full discharge 
of the duties incumbent on them respectively, and it 
is therefore expedient that provision be made for enabling 
or requiring the Colleges in each University to contribute 
more largely out of their revenues to the University 
purposes, especially with a view to further and better 
instruction in Art, Science, and other branches of learn- 
ing, where the same are not taught, or not adequately 
taught in the University : 

"And whereas it may be requisite for the purposes 
aforesaid, as regards each University, to attach Fellow- 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 219 

ships and other emoluments held in the Colleges to 
offices in the University : 

" And whereas it is also expedient to make provision 
for regulating the tenure and advantages of Fellowships 
not so attached, and for altering the conditions on which 
the same are held, and to amend in divers other particu- 
lars the law relating to the Universities and Colleges : " 

By Clauses 3 and 4 two bodies of Commissioners 
were appointed, styled respectively the University of 
Oxford Commissioners and the University of Cam- 
bridge Commissioners. 

The following were the Oxford Commissioners:— 
Lord Selborne, the Earl of Redesdale, Dr. Montagu 
Bernard, Sir William Grove, Dr. James Bellamy, Pro- 
fessor H. J. S. Smith, and Matthew White Ridley. 

The Cambridge Commissioners were Lord Chief 
Justice Cock burn, The Bishop ot Worcester, Lord 
Rayleigh, the Right Hon. E. P. Bouverie, Professor 
Lightfoot, Professor Stokes, and G. W. Hemming. 

The powers of the Commissioners were continued till 
the end of 1880, with power to the Queen in Council to 
extend the time till the end of 1881. The Commissioners 
from and after the end of 1878 had the power of making 
Statutes for the Universities and Colleges, and the 
Universities and Colleges had the like power, subject to 
the approval of the Commissioners. The effect of this 
proviso was that if a University or College did not frame 
statutes to the Commissioners' liking, the Commissioners 
could frame Statutes for it, but they could not alter a 
trust less than fifty years old (Clause 13), and were 
required to have regard to the main design of founders. 

The objects of Statutes for the University are thus 
set out (Clause 16) : — 

" AVith a view to the advancement of Art, Science, and 
other branches of learning, the Commissioners, in Statutes 
made by them for the University, may from time to time 
make provision for the following purposes or any of them: 

" (1) For enabling and requiring the several Colleges, 
or any of them, to make contribution out of their 
revenues for University purposes, regard being first had 
to the wants of the several Colleges in themselves for 
educational and other Collegiate purposes : 



220 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

" (2) For the creation, by means of contributions 
from the Colleges or otherwise of a common University 
Fund, to be administered under the supervision of the 
University : 

" (3) For making payments under the supervision of 
the University, out of the said common fund, for the 
giving of instruction, the doing of work, or the con- 
ducting of investigations within the University or 
inquiry connected with the studies of the University : 

" (4) For consolidating any two or more Professor- 
ships or Lectureships : 

" (5) For erecting and endowing Professorships or 
Lectureships : 

" (6) For abolishing Professorships or Lecture- 
ships : 

" (7) For altering the endowment of any Professor- 
ship or Lectureship : 

" (8) For altering the conditions of eligibility or 
appointment and mode of election or appointment to 
any Professorship or Lectureship, and for limiting the 
tenure thereof : 

" (9) For providing retiring pensions for Professors 
and Lecturers : 

" (10) For providing new or improving existing 
buildings, libraries, collections, or apparatus for any 
purpose connected with the instruction of any members 
of the University, or with research in any art or science 
or other branch of learning, and for maintaining the 
same : 

" (11) For diminishing the expense of University 
education by founding Scholarships tenable by students 
either at any College or Hall within the University or as 
unattached students not members of any College or Hall, 
or by paying salaries to the teachers of such unattached 
students, or by otherwise encouraging such unattached 
students 1 : 

" (12) For founding and endowing Scholarships, 
Exhibitions, and Prizes for encouragement of proficiency 
in any art or science or other branch of learning : 



i This sub-section embodies an amendment proposed by Dr. Tait, 
Archbishop of Canterbury. 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 221 

" (13) For modifying the trusts, conditions, or direc- 
tions of or affecting any University endowment, founda- 
tion, or gift, or of or affecting any Professorship, Lecture- 
ship, Scholarship, office, or institution, in or connected 
with the University, or of or affecting any property belong- 
ing to or held in trust for the University or held by the 
University in trust for a Hall, as far as the Commissioners 
think the modification thereof necessary or expedient for 
giving effect to Statutes made by them for any purpose in 
this Act mentioned : 

" (14) For regulating presentations to benefices in 
the gift of the University : 

" (15) For regulating the application of the purchase 
money for any advowson sold by the University : 

" (16) For founding any office not paid out of 
University or College funds in connexion with any special 
educational work done out of the University under the 
control of the University, and for remunerating any 
secretary or officer resident in the University and em- 
ployed there in the management of any such special 
educational work : 

" (17) For altering or repealing any Statute, Ordinance 
or regulation of the University and substituting or add- 
ing any Statute for or to the same." 

Clause 17 reads : " The Commissioners in Statutes 
made by them for a College, may from time to time make 
provision for the following purposes relative to the Col- 
lege, or any of them : 

" (1) For altering and regulating the conditions of 
eligibility or appointment including where it seems fit 
those relating to age, to any emolument or office held in 
or connected with the College, the mode of election and 
appointment thereto, and the value, length, and condi- 
tions of tenure thereof, and for providing a retiring 
pension for a holder thereof : 

" (2) For consolidating any two or more emoluments 
held in or connected with the College: 

" (3) For dividing, suspending, suppressing, con- 
verting or otherwise dealing with any emolument held in 
or connected with the College : 

" (4) For attaching any emolument held in or con- 
nected with the College to any office in the College, on 



222 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

such tenure as to the Commissioners seems fit, and for 
attaching to the emolument, in connexion with the 
office, conditions of residence, study, and duty, or any of 
them : 

" (5) For affording further or better instruction in 
any art or science or other branch of learning : 

" (6) For providing new or improving existing 
buildings, libraries, collections, or apparatus, for any 
purpose connected with instruction or research in any 
art or science or other branch of learning, and for main- 
taining the same : 

" (7) For diminishing the expense of education in the 
College : 

" (8) For modifying the trusts, conditions, or direc- 
tions affecting any College endowment, foundation, or 
gift, or any property belonging to the College, or the Head 
or any member thereof, as such, or held in trust for the 
College, or for the Head or any member thereof, as such, 
as far as the Commissioners think the modification 
thereof necessary or expedient for giving effect to 
Statutes made by them for the College : 

" (9) For regulating presentations to benefices in the 
gift of the College : 

" (10) For regulating the application of the purchase 
money for any advowson sold by the College : 

" (11) For altering or repealing any Statute, ordin- 
ance, regulation or bye-law of the College, and substitut- 
ing or adding any Statute for or to the same." 

Clause 18 reads : " The Commissioners, in Statutes 
made by them for a College, may from time to time make 
provision for the following purposes relative to the Uni- 
versity, or any Of them : 

" (1) For authorising the College to commute any 
annual payment agreed or required to be made by it 
for University purposes into a capital sum to be provided 
by the College out of money belonging to it, and not 
produced by the sale of any lands or hereditaments made 
after the passing of this Act : 

" (2) For annexing any emolument held in or con- 
nected with the College to any office in the University, or 
in a Hall, on such tenure as to the Commissioners seems 
fit, and for attaching to the emolument, in connexion 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 223 

with the office, conditions of residence, study, and duty, 
or any of them. 

" (3) For assigning a portion of the revenues or 
property of the College, as a contribution to the common 
fund or otherwise, for encouragement of instruction in 
the University in any art or science or other branch 
of learning, or for the maintenance and benefit of persons 
of known ability and learning, studying, or making 
researches in any art or science or other branch of 
learning in the University : 

" (4) For empowering the College by Statute made 
and passed at a general meeting of the Governing Body of 
the College specially summoned for this purpose, by the 
votes of not less than two-thirds of the number of persons 
present and voting, to transfer the library of the College, 
or any portion thereof, to any University library : 

" (5) For providing out of the revenues of the College 
for payments to be made, under the supervision of the 
University, for work done or investigations conducted in 
any branch of learning or inquiry connected with the 
studies of the University within the University : 

" (6) For giving effect to Statutes made by the 
Commissioners for the University : 

" (7) For modifying the trusts, conditions, or direc- 
tions of or affecting any College endowment, foundation, 
or gift, concerning or relating to the University, as far as 
the Commissioners think the modification thereof neces- 
sary or expedient for giving effect to Statutes made by 
them for the University." 

Clause 21: "The Commissioners, in Statutes made by 
them, shall from time to time make provision — 

" (1) For the form of accounts of the University, and 
of a College relating to funds administered either for 
general purposes, or in trust, or otherwise, and for the 
audit and publication thereof : 

" (2) For the publication of accounts of receipts and 
expenditure of money raised under the borrowing powers 
of the University or of a College : 

" And the Commissioners, in Statutes made by them, 
may from time to time, if they think fit, make provision — 

" (3) For regulating the exercise of the borrowing 
powers of the University or of a College : 



224 UNIVEKSITY REFORM. 

" (4) For regulating the conditions under which 
beneficial leases niay be renewed by the University or a 
College." 

Clause 22 : " The Commissioners, in Statutes made by 
them, may from time to time make provision for the 
complete or partial union of two or more Colleges, or of a 
College or Colleges and a Hall or Halls, or of two or more 
Halls, or of a College or Hall, with any institution in the 
University, or for the organization of a combined 
educational system in and for two or more Colleges or 
Halls, provided application in that behalf is made to the 
Commissioners on the part of each College and Hall and 
institution as follows : 

" In the case of a College in the University of Oxford, 
by a resolution passed at a general meeting of the 
Governing Body of the College specially summoned for 
this purpose, by the votes of not less than two-thirds of 
the number of persons present and voting, and, in case of 
an application for complete union, with the consent in 
writing of the Visitor of the College. 

The regulations for Cambridge are the same, except 
that in the case of complete union, the two-thirds 
majority is sufficient, without the consent of the Visitor. 
Clause 44 : " There shall be a Committee of Her 
Majesty's Privy Council styled The Universities' Com- 
mittee of the Privy Council. 

" The Universities' Committee shall consist of the 
President for the time being of the Privy Council, the 
Archbishop of Canterbury for the time being, the Lord 
Chancellor of Great Britain for the time being, the 
Chancellor of the University of Oxford for the time being, 
if a member of the Privy Council, the Chancellor of the 
University of Cambridge for the time being, if a member 
of the Privy Council, and such other member or two 
members of the Privy Council as Her Majesty from time 
to time thinks fit to appoint in that behalf, that other 
member, or one at least of those two other members, 
being a member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy 
Council." 

Clause 52 : " If after the cesser of the powers of the 
Commissioners any doubt arises with respect to the true 
meaning of any Statute made by the Commissioners for 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 225 

the University of Cambridge, the Council of the Senate 
may apply to the Chancellor of the University for the 
time being, and he may declare in writing the meaning of 
the Statute on the matter submitted to him, and his 
declaration shall be registered by the Registrary of the 
University, and the meaning of the Statute as therein 
declared shall be deemed to be the true meaning thereof." 

Clauses 53 and 54 give power to make alterations in 
the University and College Statutes, and Clause 55 gives 
the method of procedure. 

The effects of the Act of 1877 may be judged of by the 
following extract, 1 what is said of one College being sub- 
stantially true of all the rest. 

" The changes introduced by the Statutes of 1882, 
which were the outcome of the Commissioners' labours, 
constituted a veritable revolution in the history of 
Jesus College. Some of these changes — such as the 
limitation of the emoluments of Fellowships, the 
abolition of celibacy as the condition of their tenure, 
the limitation of the period during which unofficial 
Fellowships were tenable, and the obligation imposed 
on the College of contributing to the common funds 
of the University — were features introduced into the 
Statutes of all Colleges alike. A few of those which 
concerned Jesus individually may be mentioned. To the 
Master and Fellows was given the right to elect to the 
Mastership and all Fellowships, unfettered by any refer- 
ence to the Bishop of Ely. Religious tests were no 
longer required of a Fellow on his admission, and Clerical 
restrictions were abolished. The proportion of the College 
revenue allotted to the Open Scholarship Fund was aug- 
mented from a twentieth to a tenth part." 

Clerical Fellowships thus quietly ceased to be, and the 
principle of religious equality was everywhere recognised 
except in the case of the Divinity Degrees. The tests in 
connexion with these degrees have since been abolished at 
Cambridge ; Oxford has voted for their retention by a 
large majority; when she comes into line with Cambridge, 
the victory will be complete. 

The Commissioners continued in power till 1881, when 

i Gray, Jesus College, pp. 230-231. 



226 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

the new Statutes were issued. These came into force in 
1882, and constitute the Code of Laws by which the 
University and the Colleges are still governed. The most 
important provisions of the University Statutes are here 

summarised. 

Terms. 

There are to be three Terms in the year, including two 
hundred and twenty-seven days at least. A Term may be 
kept by residence during not less than three-quarters of 
it. 1 Three-quarters of two hundred and twenty-seven is 
just one hundred and seventy, so that a student need reside, 
and in fact does reside, only eight weeks in each Term to 
comply with the Statute. Terms are thus very short and 
crowded, and the time for teaching is much less than 
is required for the Tripos Examinations. Surely it is not 
too much to ask that there should be thirty clear weeks 
or two hundred and ten days instruction in the academic 
year. This is a very old demand on the part of reformers. 

Contributions of Colleges for University Purposes.' 1 
1. "Each of the Colleges shall pay to the University 
in every year for University purposes the sum determined 
by the subsequent provisions of this Statute, according to 
a percentage on its income. 

"The income of a College shall be taken to be the gross 
income, external and internal, including the profits, if 
any, derived from the hall, kitchen, buttery, sale of 
commodities, and supply of service, including also such 
parts of the income arising from the investment of sums 
received from members of the College as compositions for 
dues payable to the University or to the Colleges, or both, 
as may be applied, either yearly or otherwise, to the 
general revenue of the College or to any purpose within 
the College ; not including, however, the rents paid for 
rooms, but including instead thereof the amount at 
which the College buildings are from time to time 
assessed for municipal rates, after deducting from such 
gross income any sums paid thereout under the several 
heads next following : — 

(a) Rates, taxes, and insurance on the College build- 
ings. 

l Statutes of the University of Cambridge, p. 11. ~ lb. pp. 37-39. 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 227 

(b) Rates, taxes, insurances, tithe or other rent-charge, 
fee farm rents, quit rents, fines on copyhold estates, fines 
on renewals of leases, if and when paid by the College. 

(c) The University dues paid to the University in 
each year by the College for such of its members as have 
not made compositions for dues payable to the University 
or the College. 

(d) The cost of maintenance and repairs of the College 
buildings. 

(e) The cost of maintenance, repairs, and improve- 
ments on the College estates incurred by the College. 

(/') Necessary repairs of chancels in all cases where 
the same are chargeable upon the College and paid by it. 

(g) Compulsory charges on the College estates or 
general revenue for the augmentation of benefices, and 
stipends of perpetual curates in parishes where the Col- 
lege possesses tithe rent-charge or land given in lieu of 
tithe. 

(//) The cost of management of the College estates, 
including the stipends paid to College officers for the 
purpose. 

(i) The interest on debts and loans and the repay- 
ment of principal money by instalments in all cases in 
which the debt has been incurred or the loan contracted 
for the extension of the College buildings or for the 
improvement of the College estates and such instalments 
are spread over a period of not less than twenty years. 

(A) Such receipts from minerals or other sources as 
the College is by law required to treat as capital. 

(I) Such portions of the income of trust funds as are 
applicable exclusively to purposes without the College. 

(m) One half of the income derived from the tuition 
fees paid by the students. 

2. "The aggregate sum to be contributed by the 
Colleges in every year from January 1st, 1883, to the 
[end of the year 1884 shall be not less than £5000 nor 
1 more than £6000 ; in each of the years 1885, 1886, 1887, not 
less than £10,000 nor more than £12,000; in each of the 
years 1888, 1889, 1890, not less than £15,000 nor more than 
£18,000 ; in each of the years 1891, 1892, 1893, not less than 
£20,000 nor more than £24,000 ; in each of the years 1894, 
1895, 1896, not less than £25,000 nor more than £30,000 ; 



228 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

and in every subsequent year £30,000, or such larger 
sum being not greater than £30,500 as may be found 
more convenient for the purpose of calculating the rate 
per centum in any year. Provided that in case it appears 
at any time hereafter to the Financial Board hereinafter 
constituted that the aggregate income of the Colleges has 
fallen so low that the contribution required under this 
Chapter would be an excessive burden on the Colleges, the 
Chancellor may, upon the application of the Financial 
Board, inquire into the matter, and if he be satisfied that 
the fact is so, he may at his discretion direct that the 
amount to be levied be diminished for any period not ex- 
ceeding five years by any sum not exceeding one-fifth part 
of the minimum amount named for each year of such 
period." 

Section 3 directs that in 1894 and each succeeding 
year each College shall be entitled to deduct from its 
contribution £200 for each Professorial Fellowship held 
by a Professor of the University. 

Such is the legislation which has finally carried out 
the intention of the Royal Commissioners of 1850 that the 
Colleges should contribute from their funds to University 
purposes. The weak spot in it lies on the surface. The 
cost of maintenance and repairs of both College buildings 
and College estates, the cost of improvements on the 
estates, interest on loans and instalments of principal 
money, are all allowed to be deducted from gross income. 
The Colleges have interpreted this permission generously 
in certain cases, and can plead in their favour that there 
is no definition of, or authority to, define " improvements." 
Moreover, if a College makes an extension and pays for 
it out of current income it can deduct the whole amount. 
These points will be recurred to in Chapters XI. and XII. 

In 1877 there was an established belief that the 
financial resources of the Colleges would speedily show a 
substantial increase. The agricultural depression which 
followed falsified this hope, and in 1903, 1904 and 1905 the 
Chancellor of Cambridge University reduced the statu- 
tory contribution according to the provision quoted 
above. 

The Common University Fund. 

The College contributions are paid into the Common 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 229 

University Fund, the accounts of which are kept distinct 
from those of the Chest or University accounts proper. 

Payments out of this Fund may be made for the 
following purposes only : — 

The stipends of Professors, Readers, and University 
Lecturers ; 

Retiring pensions for emeriti Professors and Readers ; 

The salaries of Demonstrators, Superintendents, and 
Curators ; 

The erection of Museums, Laboratories, Libraries, 
Lecture-rooms, and other rooms for University business ; 

Grants for research. 

The sum paid in any year for the provision of sites 
and the erection of buildings and for the maintenance 
and furniture of buildings, including interest and sinking- 
fund payments, must not exceed one-third of the income 
of the Fund for that year. 

Lord John Russell, as we have seen, was of opinion 
that the Colleges might fairly be called on to contribute 
one-fifth of their income, or 20 per cent., to University 
purposes. Such a levy would nearly double the present 
contribution at Cambridge of £30,000. 

The property and income of the University, i.e. both 
the Chest and the Common University Fund, were placed 
by the same legislation under 

The Financial Board. 

Statute B, Chapter IV., reads : 1 — 

" 1. A Financial Board shall be appointed for the 
care and management of the property and income of the 
University, consisting of the Vice-Chancellor, two mem- 
bers of the General Board of Studies elected by that 
Board, four members of the Senate elected by the 
Colleges in common, and four members of the Senate 
elected by Grace on the nomination of the Council of the 
Senate. 

" 2. For the purpose of the election of members of 
the Board by the Colleges in common, each College shall 
elect one representative. The Vice-Chancellor shall 
summon a meeting of the representatives of the Colleges 
for the election of members of the Senate to serve on the 

i lb. pp. 44, 45. 



230 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Board. Each representative shall have one vote, to- 
gether with one additional vote for each complete £100 
for which the College is assessed in the preceding year 
for University purposes. 

" 3. Of the members of the Board elected by the 
Colleges in common, not more than one shall belong to 
any one College." 

The Board every year prepares a statement of the 
sum which in its judgment ought to be levied on the 
Colleges, declares the respective incomes of the several 
Colleges which are subject to percentage, assesses the 
Colleges for their proportional payments, and collects 
the money. It has also power to require from any 
College explanations of the published College accounts, 
subject to an appeal to the Chancellor. If any question 
arises between the Financial Board respecting the amount 
of income subject to percentage, the matter is referred to 
the Chancellor, whose decision is final. 

Special Boards of Studies. 1 

The Statutes of 1882 repealed the Statute for the 
appointment of Boards of Studies made in 1860 and intro- 
duced the amended regulations set out below. 

2. "The University shall appoint Special Boards of 
Studies for all important departments of study recog- 
nised in the University, to consist of the Professors 
hereinafter assigned to such Boards severally, together 
with such Readers, University Lecturers, Examiners and 
other persons as may be appointed from time to time by 
or under the authority of a Grace of the Senate. 

3. "The number of such Special Boards to be ap- 
pointed as soon as may be after the approval of this 
Statute by the Queen in Council shall be twelve, viz., for 

Divinity. Mathematics. 

Law. Physics and Chemistry. 

Medicine. Biology and Geology. 

Classics. History and Archaeology. 

Oriental Studies. Moral Science. 
Mediaeval and Modern Music." 
Languages. 

i lb. pp. 48, 49. 



THE LEGISLATION OF THE SEVENTIES. 231 

To these have since been added — 

Indian Civil Service Military Studies. 

Studies. Anthropological Studies. 

Economics and Politics. Architectural Studies. 
Agricultural Studies Foreign Service Students 

and Forestry. Committee. 

Geographical Studies. 

4. By this Clause, five Professors are assigned to 
Divinity, three to Law, four to Medicine, two to Classics, 
and so on. 

The duties of the Boards are thus denned : l — 

" (6) It shall be the duty of every Special Board to 
consult together from time to time on all matters relating 
to the studies and examinations of the University in its 
department, and to prepare, whenever it appears to them 
desirable, and present to the Vice-Chancellor, a report to 
be published by him to the University. 

" The Board shall also, after consultation with the 
Professors, Readers, and University Lecturers connected 
with its department, frame a scheme of lectures in every 
year: taking care to provide that the subjects of the said 
lectures be determined with regard to the general objects 
of every particular Professorship, and so as to distribute 
the several branches of learning in the department among 
the said Professors, Readers and University Lecturers ; 
having regard also to the regulations and instructions 
which the General Board of Studies may have issued. 

" (7) Every scheme so settled by any Special Board 
shall be submitted to the General Board of Studies ; and 
no scheme shall be taken to be final until it has received 
the approval of the said General Board." 

Let us next turn to the 

General Board of Studies* 

" 9. The University shall appoint a General Board of 
Studies, consisting of the Vice-Chancellor, one member of 
each Special Board of Studies elected by that Special 
Board, and eight members of the Senate elected by Grace. 

" 12. It shall be the duty of the General Board to 
consult together from time to time on all matters relating 
to the studies and examinations of the University, in- 

l lb. pp. 50, 51. 2 lb. pp. 51, 52. 



232 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

eluding the maintenance and improvement of existing 
institutions, and the establishment and maintenance of 
new institutions. They shall prepare, whenever it appears 
to them desirable, and present to the Vice-Chancellor, a 
report to be published by him to the University. 

" 13. The General Board shall issue from time to 
time as they think fit, regulations and instructions in 
respect to the subjects and character of the lectures to be 
delivered, the superintendence of laboratory work, the 
subordination when necessary of the Readers and Uni- 
versity Lecturers to the Professors, the extent to which 
in any cases discourses shall be supplemented by oral 
or written examinations, the times and places of lecturing, 
the arrangements to be made for the distribution of 
students among the different teachers, so as to secure 
classes of suitable size, and to group separately the more 
and less advanced students, and any other matters 
affecting the method of instruction to be pursued, with 
the view of providing suitable and efficient education in 
all subjects of University study for all students whether 
more or less advanced who may require it. 

" 14. The General Board shall also consider the 
schemes for lectures in every year submitted to it by 
the several Special Boards, and shall approve the said 
schemes or remit them for further consideration with 
alterations and amendments, or, if necessary, frame 
schemes ; provided that, in case the General Board of 
Studies and any of the Special Boards shall be unable to 
agree to any scheme, the question shall be referred to a 
meeting of the Members of the General Board and of the 
Special Board deliberating together, whose decision shall 
be final. When such schemes have been finally deter- 
mined, the General Board shall present them to the Vice- 
Chancellor for publication." 

The composition and powers of the Financial Board, 
the General Board of Studies, and the Special Boards of 
Studies should be carefully considered, as it is through 
these bodies that the unification of the University, if 
thought desirable, must be effected. 



CHAPTER X. 

THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS FROM OXFORD 
AND CAMBRIDGE. 

The latest suggestions from Oxford are contained in 
Lord Curzon's book entitled " Principles and Methods of 
University Reform," published in 1909. Lord Curzon is 
Chancellor of the University of Oxford, and the book is 
I a letter addressed in his official capacity to the University. 
In a preliminary letter to the Vice-Chancellor he explains 
that the immediate cause of his taking action was the 
debate in the House of Lords in July, 1907, initiated by 
the Bishop of Birmingham, 1 " in which he asked for the 
appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the 
endowment, government, administration, and teaching of 
the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and their 
i constituent Colleges, in order to secure the best use of 
their resources for the benefit of all classes of the com- 
munity." Lord Curzon was strongly opposed to the 
appointment of any such Commission, and his Memor- 
andum is an attempt to show how Oxford can reform 
I itself and so escape further legislation by Parliament. 
He tries in fact himself to discharge the functions of a 
Royal Commission. 

Chapter I. Introduction. 
Lord Curzon recognises that there was no finality in 
the work of previous Commissions and the legislation 
which followed on their labours. " We find the Reformers 
of 1850 engaged in the attempt to reanimate and re- 
inthrone the University as against the alleged encroach- 
ments of the Collegiate system, and we recognise the 
same note in the utterances of the present day. We find 
the Commissioners of that date devoting pages of print 
to an examination of the conditions and a suggestion of 
the methods by which Oxford might reopen its gates to 

1 Dr. Gore, now Bishop of Oxford. 



234 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

the poor ; and such is again the cry which we hear in 
Parliament and in the Press. One of the principal 
objects of the first Commissioners was the creation of a 
Governing Body (in the shape of a reformed Congrega- 
tion) which should represent the teaching element of the 
University ; and such is still the aspiration of those who 
are dissatisfied with the present composition of that 
body. The second Commission created the very Boards 
of Faculties whose organisation and work are now 
impugned. They definitely formulated and enforced the 
principle of College responsibility for a portion at any 
rate of the expenditure of the University, and they called 
into being the Common University Fund. But no finality 
has been reached in respect of these matters, and they 
are still the subject of acute, though friendly controversy. 
The same Commission required the auditing and publica- 
tion of accounts — reforms which are admittedly suscep- 
tible of further improvement and extension. They carried 
the principle of open competition in respect both of 
Fellowships and Scholarships to an extreme pitch, with 
the consequence that a reaction has set in, and the 
administration of both forms of endowment is again in 
dispute. They made tentative provision for the Endow- 
ment of Research. But the strides made in advanced 
study have been so enormous in the last quarter of a 
century that what was thought liberal in 1882 is now 
generally regarded as halting and inadequate." * But Lord 
Curzon still urges the old plea that Oxford is able to 
reform itself from within. 

He classifies his suggestions under the following 
heads : — 

"I. The Constitution of the University, as consisting 
of Council, Congregation, and Convocation. 

II. The admission of poor men, both of the pro- 
fessional and working classes, which will open up the 
allied questions of the Collegiate and Non-Collegiate 
systems, the University Extension movement, and that 
for Working-men's Colleges, the cost of living, and the 
incidence of Fees and Dues. 

III. The administration of Endowments — Scholar- 
ships, Exhibitions, and Fellowships. 

l Principles and Methods, pp. 16, 17. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 235 

IV. The requirement of Greek in Responsions, and 
the question of a University Entrance Examination, and 
other examinations. 

V. The relations of the University and the Colleges 
(a) in their educational, and (b) in their financial aspect. 
The former branch of the subject includes the difficult 
questions of the Boards of Faculties and the better 
organisation of University teaching. The second branch 
will lead to the discussion of the principle and practice of 
College contributions to the funds of the University, 
and the desirability of a further extension. 

VI. The Financial administration (a) of the Uni- 
versity, and (b) of the Colleges. 

VII. The executive machinery of University admin- 
istration. 

VIII. Facilities for advanced study and Research. 

IX. Independent subjects that do not fall directly 
under any of the foregoing heads." 1 

Chapter II. The Constitution of the University. 

The Council. 

Three criticisms are noticed which have been made 
upon the Hebdomadal Council as now constituted : (1) the 
Heads of Houses are over-represented ; (2) the Heads of 
Houses ought to be chosen, not because they are Heads, 
but because of their personal qualifications ; (3) the 
Council does not sufficiently represent the teaching of 
the University. It is suggested " that the class system 
should be abolished altogether, and that the entire 
eighteen places should be thrown open to M.A.'s of five 
years' standing." a 

Congregation. 

Congregation, as at present constituted, consists of 
the ex-ojficio members as set out in the Act of 1854, 
and of a much larger number of members qualified \>y 
residence for twenty weeks of the year within a mile 
and a half of Carfax — the total being somewhat over 
500 persons. 

i lb. pp. 19, 20. 

2 lb. p. 25. On May 5th, 1913, a series of resolutions was passed 
in Congregation dealing with the composition of the Hebdomadal Council. 
At Oxford such l-esolutions form the foundation of future legislation. 



236 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Lord Curzon gives an interesting history of this body. 
It was once a guild composed of all the Masters and 
Teachers of the University, but long before 1850 it had 
lost practically all its powers. " One of the main objects 
of the Commissioners of that date was the resuscitation 
of this body and the restoration of governing powers to 
the teaching element in Oxford. Accordingly they pro- 
posed a House of somewhat over a 100 members, to be 
composed of the Heads of Houses, the Proctors, the Pro- 
fessors and Public Lecturers, and the Senior Tutor of 
each College. . . But by a strange oversight Lord John 
Russell's Government in 1854, in creating the new Con- 
gregation, forgot to disestablish the old, and accordingly 
there still exists by the side of the present House another 
body known as ' The Ancient House of Congregation ' 
consisting of Heads of Houses, Doctors and Masters of 
two years' standing, Resident Doctors, Professors and 
Examiners. The functions of this body are limited to the 
granting of ordinary degrees, and the confirmation of the 
appointment of Examiners." J 

The writer's further discussion of the reform of 
Congregation may be omitted because on March 4th of 
the present year (1913), " the Statute respecting the 
constitution of Congregation, which provides that resi- 
dence shall no longer be a qualification for membership 
thereof, but that in future Congregation shall consist of 
the teaching and administrative elements in the Uni- 
versity and Colleges, was submitted to the House of 
Convocation for final approval, and was approved by a 
majority of 28. (Placets, 77 ; Non-Placets, 49.)" 2 Provision 
is made in the neAV Statute for safeguarding existing 
rights; but Oxford has this year done "what the Royal 
Commissioners of 1850 desired, what Lord John Russell 
desired, and what Mr. Gladstone desired to do just 60 
years ago." 3 

i lb. pp. 27, 28. 2 Times' report of March 5. 

3 Principles, p. 31. The text of the Statute is set out in the Oxford 
University Gazette of March 5th, 1913, pp. 551, 552 and runs as follows : — 

"1. As from the first day of September next following the date of the 
approval of this Statute by His Majesty in Council, the Congregation of 
the University shall, subject to the provisions of cl. 2 below, consist of 
the following persons only, the said persons being members of Convo- 
cation : 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 237 

Convocation. 
Convocation is a more serious problem. " The present 
number of Convocation (which in 1852 was 3,300, and in 
1868, 4,000) is over 6,700 : and it consists of all M.A.'s and 

(1) The Chancellor. 

(2) The High Steward. 

(3) The Vice-Chancellor. 
(4; The Proctors. 

(5) Members of the Hebdomadal Council. 

(6) The Officers named in the Schedule annexed. 

(7) The Professors, as defined in Section 48 of the Oxford Univer- 

sity Act, 1854. 

(8) Assistant or Deputy Professors, University Lecturers, and 

University Demonstrators. 

(9) The Masters of the Schools, Moderators, Public Examiners, 

and Examiners for the degrees in Civil Law, Medicine, and 
Music. 

(10) The Members of the Faculties, and the Members of the Boards 

of Faculties as respectively defined in Title V of the Statutes 
of the University, and such members of Convocation, belong- 
ing to the teaching or administrative element in the Univer- 
sity and Colleges, as shall be designated by any Board of a 
Faculty as fit and proper persons to be members of Congre- 
gation on account of work done by them in the subjects with 
which that Faculty is conversant ; a list of such persons to 
be drawn up by each Board at its last meeting in Trinity 
Term. 

(11) Members of, and Secretaries to, Delegacies, Boards, Com- 

mittees, and bodies of Curators and Visitors, established by 
any Statute of the University. 

(12) Assistants, Librarians, and any other members of the perma- 

nent staff of any University Institution which is controlled 
by a Delegacy, Board, Committee, or body of Curators or 
Visitors, established by any Statute of the University. 

(13) Heads of Colleges, Public Halls and New Foundations, the 

Censor of Non-Collegiate Students, and Heads of Private 
Halls. 

(14) Members of the Governing Bodies of Colleges, and the prin- 

cipal Bursar or Treasurer of each College, if he be not a 
member of its Governing Body. 

(15) All persons who, on the day of the approval of this Statute by 

His Majesty in Council, are, and have been continuously for 
the ten years immediately before that day, members of any 
one or more of the above fourteen classes. 

(16) All such persons as shall be provided to be added by election 

or otherwise by any Statute of the University made with the 
approval of His Majesty in Council. 
The Chancellor, or in his absence the Vice-Chancellor or his deputy, 
shall preside in the said Congregation : and the Congregation so con- 
stituted as aforesaid shall have power to frame regulations for the order 
of its own proceedings, but subject to any Statute which the University 
may make in respect thereof. 

2. Every person who under the provisions of Section 16 of the 
Oxford University Act, 1854, would on the first day of September next 



238 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Doctors of Oxford, whether resident or non-resident, 
who have kept their names on the books both of the 
University and of any College or Hall. 

" Its functions are the following : — It elects the 
Chancellor of the University. It elects the University 
representatives in Parliament. It confers Honorary and 
Diploma Degrees. It transacts much of the ordinary 
business of the University by means of Decrees. Above 
all it has the final voice in all University legislation, con- 
firming or rejecting (without the right to amend) the 
Statutes passed by Congregation." * 

This last fact is all important. The reform of Con- 
gregation which has just been mentioned is distinctly a 
step in advance, but the decisions of the new body as of 



following the date of the approval of this Statute by His Majesty in 
Council have been entitled to be a member of the Congregation of the 
University by reason of residence, and who shall on or before the thirty- 
tirst day of August next following the said first day of September have 
given notice in writing to the Vice-Chancellor that he desires to continue 
to be a member of the said Congregation, shall continue to be a member 
of the said Congregation so long as he continues to be a resident within 
the meaning of Section 48 of the Oxford University Act, 1854, without 
interruption. 

3. The Vice-Chancellor shall, before the 25th day of September in 
each year, make and promulgate a register of the persons qualified to the 
best of his knowledge to be members of the Congregation of the Univer- 
sity of Oxford. He shall also from time to time make and promulgate all 
such regulations as to the said register and otherwise as may be necessary 
for the assembling together of the Congregation, and shall appoint the 
time and the place at which it shall so assemble together ; and no person 
shall be admitted to vote in or act as a member of the Congregation 
unless he is included in such register and is one of the persons qualified 
under clause 1 or clause 2 above. 

Schedule. 
Deputy Steward. 
Public Orator. 
Keeper of the Archives. 
Assessor of the Chancellor's Court. 
Registrar of the University. 
Counsel to the University. 
Bodley's Librarian. 

Sub-Librarians of the Bodleian Library. 
Radcliffe Librarian. 
Radcliffe Observer. 
Assistant Registrar. 

Keeper of the Antiquarium in the Ashmolean Museum. 
Keeper of the Art Galleries in the Ashmolean Museum. 
Keeper of the Hope Collection of Engraved Portraits. 
Curator of the Pitt-Rivers Museum." 

i lb. pp. 33, 34. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 239 

the old will be subject to the approval of Convocation, 
and may be upset by it as before. The only advantage 
which the advocates of the reformed Congregation have 
been able to claim for it, is that it will be representative of 
the views of the real University — the body which actually 
teaches and administers, and that the outsiders will in 
consequence have more scruple about overriding its 
wishes. 

Lord Curzon's criticism of Convocation cannot help 
being severe. " In theory the constitution of this body, 
which is supposed to be coextensive with the graduates of 
[the University, is unimpeachable and democratic. But 
[the practice differs widely from the theory. For in the 
first place it represents not all graduates, but 011I3- such 
graduates (B.A.'s) as have thought it worth while or have 
possessed the means to pay £12 to the University to 
obtain the M.A. degree, in addition to such fee as their 
College may require for the same step, and who further 
have compounded or have continued to pay to the Univer- 
sity and the College such additional annual fee as either 
may exact. Out of the total number of B.A.'s it is calcu- 
lated that only one-third proceed to the M.A. degree and 
become members of Convocation. In other words, the 
franchise is not primarily educational but pecuniary: 1 and 
the Pass-man who can afford the cost becomes a member 
of the Governing Body of the University, while the 
Honours man who cannot afford it does not. And 
secondly, it is a matter of common knowledge that while 
it contains representatives of many and diverse classes, 
the two classes who are most strongly represented in the 
ranks of Convocation are the members of the clerical and 
scholastic professions who find it of value to retain their 
connexion with the University. However this may be, 
it is indisputable that Convocation contains only a 
minority of those who have proceeded to a University 
degree, and that its representative aspect is sectional 
rather than catholic." 2 



1 The reader will remember Mark Pattison's remark that the founda- 
tion of the University is property and not intelligence. See above, 
p. 165. 

2 lb. pp. 34, 35. 



240 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Various proposals have been made for the reform of 
Convocation. Of these the first to be noticed by Lord 
Curzon is that advocated by Jowett and his followers — 
the restriction of its powers so that it could not 
interfere in the internal government of the University, , 
or in educational matters. To this Lord Curzon objects i 
that " it would be handing over the University to an i 
oligarchy of resident teachers, to some extent detached 1 
from the outside world and independent of its criticism. . 
. . Further, is it not of supreme importance to main- 
tain the connexion of Oxford with its old members, and, , 
through them, with the nation at large ? " Lord Curzon i 
concludes : " For reasons such as these it appears to me i 
that any attempt to sweep away Convocation as the final ! 
court in University matters would be doomed to probable 
failure." 1 

The second proposal is to confine the degree of M.A. 
to those who have either taken an Honour School or I 
something more than the mere Pass course. This 
" would be a reversion to the original theory on which 
Convocation was based, viz. that the M.A. degree which 
gave entry to Convocation and a share in the government 
of the University, was a certificate of proficiency as a 
teacher." 2 But there are objections to this course. Would 
it be wise to depreciate the lower degree and to deter the 
average Oxford man from taking it ? Again, in the event 
of Convocation falling off in numbers, with a consequent 
loss to the revenues of the University, would there not 
be a temptation to recoup that loss by lowering the 
standard of the Honour Schools ? Thirdly, there is no 
fundamental difference in quality or merit between the 
low-class Honours man and the better Pass-man. 3 

The third proposal is to expand Convocation by 
reducing the fees to a relatively nominal amount so that 
practically all who take the B.A. might proceed to the 
M.A. degree. But the pecuniary sacrifice might be very 
great, and Convocation might become of a too great size. 

The fourth proposal is to leave Convocation as it is, 
and to introduce some form of suspensory veto. " Many 
variations of this form of limited prerogative will suggest 

116. p. 37. 2 16. p. 38. 'sib. p. 39. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 241 

themselves. This idea of reform seems to follow the line 
of least resistance." ' 

Chapter III. The Admission of Poor Men. 
" Of all the criticisms," writes Lord Curzon, " passed 
upon modern Oxford, none can compare in the earnest- 
ness, amounting often to vehemence, with which it is 
urged, or in the interest which it excites, with the com- 
plaint that neither the education, the endowments, nor 
the social advantages of the University are sufficiently 
open to the man of humble means. We are told that 
Oxford is a place where the standard of living is high, and 
, that of learning low ; that it is the resort of idlers and 
loafers ; that its endowments, intended for the poor, are 
, wasted upon those who do not require them ; that it is 
out of touch with the main system of national education, 
of which it ought to be the apex and crown ; and that it 
is, in fact, the University of the leisured classes instead 
of the nation. Even Bishop Gore did not shrink from 
': describing it in the House of Lords as ' a playground for 
[the sons of the wealthier classes,' and as ' not in any 
serious sense a place of study at all."" 2 

The Commissioners of 1850 had the same problem 
-before them, " but they deliberately declined to cater for 
tthe poor as such. . . They were more concerned in 
helping real ability than they were in compensating real 
poverty. 3 The remedial measures proposed by them — 
inotably the argument for Open Scholarships — bore the 
'impress of this idea. . . Their other remedial measures 
either failed of their object or were not attended with the 
desired results, in some cases because academic opinion 
was half-hearted or divided upon them, in others because 
no action was taken on those sections of the Report." 4 
Pattison advocated the Non-Collegiate system ; and 
Jowett, University Extension. Lord Curzon thinks the 
first thing necessary is "to distinguish between the various 
classes to whom the term ' poor ' has been generically 
applied." 3 But before opening the University to the poor, 
he is anxious it should not be closed to the rich. 

i lb. p. 40. 2 76. p. 42. 

3 The Commissioners' view was that " what the State and the Church 
require is not poor men, but good and able men whether rich or poor." 
4 lb. pp. 43, 44. 5 lb. p. 45. 

R 



242 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

"Spurn not the nobly born," he says in the familiar 
words of Gilbert. Indeed, in a sense, the rich man is 
indispensable to the poor man, " for without his pecuniary 
contribution to the University there would not be that 
surplus, without which the University and Colleges in 
combination could not pay their way." 1 Besides which, 
Oxford in educating the so-called upper classes is fulfilling 
a duty every whit as national and as imperial as in 
stretching her resources to the uttermost for the, 
assistance of the poor. 

Lord Curzon makes a second reservation under this 
head. It is "that the standard of living at Oxford is], 
primarily created by the majority of the students who 
frequent it," and that " no curtailment of expenditure, no 
redistribution of wealth that might take place, can 
permanently bring down the Collegiate system of living 
at Oxford, differing as it does toto caelo from the practice 
of Scotch or German Universities, to the level of economy 
that is possible in those places." 2 He then divides the 
poor into two classes, the industrial or wage-earning or 
artisan class, and the professional class in its many 
ramifications. The University must provide for both, 
but it will require to provide for them by different means. 

Needs of the Working-Classes. 

These are set out in the Report (issued in December 
1908) of the Joint Committee of representatives of the: 
University and of working-class organisations. The best 
of the working-classes are seeking " that training in 
citizenship which the study of political and economic 
science and of social and industrial history will give, 
and which Oxford, with its traditions of a wide outlook 
on public affairs, is more likely than any other Uni- 
versity to bestow." 8 

As for the opportunities already provided by Oxford 
for working-class education, there may be mentioned, first, 

The Non-Collegiate System. 

Lord Curzon begins with a noteworthy admission. 

" The Non-Collegiate system, though intended for the 

relief of the poor, was not designed for, and has not 

been utilised by, the working-classes as such." But "it 

l lb. p. 46. 2 lb. p. 48. 3 lb. p. 51. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 243 

endeavours to give every privilege which the University 
has it in its power to bestow, except that of life inside 
a College. — Further, its education is most moderate 
in cost. The entrance fees and dues amount to £10; 
the annual cost of board and lodging (in the lodgings 
licensed for the purpose), education, and examination 
is about 4'52 : the total annual expenses at Oxford of 
such a student are about £70." ' But there are certain 
drawbacks to the system. The name is against it, and 
Lord Curzon suggests that the Non-Collegiate students 
should henceforth be called University students. Then 
the instruction provided still leaves much to be desired. 
But the chief impediment is the superior attractiveness 
of the Colleges and College life. The number of students 
in 1908 and 1909 showed a decline as compared with 
the average of the four years 1878-1881, being 166 and 
172 against 202. 2 

The University Extension System. 

This section relates to work outside the University, 
and as these pages deal with internal University Reform, 
it is here omitted, as are also the sections on 

Proposals of the Working -Class Education Committee 
and Raskin College. 

" Other suggestions that have been made are that 
Colleges should build 

Hostels 

attached to themselves for the special accommodation of 
poorer men, including working-men ; or that such Hostels 
should be created independently of the Colleges, whether 
of the academical type or under private supervision. . . 
In both cases, and particularly in that of the independent 
Hostel, the difficulties of discipline and control would be 
considerable; and there would remain the danger, which 
led the Commission of 1850 to regard all these proposals 
with suspicion, that a distinct line of social cleavage 
might be created between the well-to-do man and the poor 
■ man." 8 Public Halls seem to be tending towards extinc- 
tion, and there are at Oxford only three Private Halls 
with an undergraduate membership of not much over 



1 lb. pp. 52, 53. 2 lb: p. 54. 3 16. pp. 61, 62. 



244 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

fifty. Lord Curzon's own idea is to found at Oxford a 
University 

Working -men's College 

not confined to artisans alone, but embracing the members 
of all those classes who are too poor, even with financial 
assistance, to enter the ordinary Colleges, or to spend 
half the year in vacations. Such a College should have a 
fixed scale of cost, if possible, not more than i'60 per 
annum. The Principal would be appointed by the Uni- 
versity. The members of the College would be matricu- 
lated and subject to academic discipline, but would not as 
a rule proceed to a degree. The normal course would be 
one of two years, leading to a Diploma, the subjects of 
study being Sociology and Economics, with an admixture 
of History, Geography, English Literature, and Natural 
Science. If any student, after receiving his Diploma, 
wished to stay on and take a degree, he should be at 
liberty to do so. The College would remain in session 
throughout the vacation, special arrangements being 
made for lectures and tuition. 1 

The Poor of other Classes. 

From the artisan poor Lord Curzon passes to the poor 
of other classes, the sons of tradesmen, farmers, teachers 
in Primary and Secondary Schools, poor clergymen, 
small professional men, solicitors, land agents, doctors, 
etc. These classes may also be distinguished by the 
schools from which they come, the richer classes coming 
from the Public Schools, and the poorer classes, after 
passing through the Elementary School, coming from 
schools of the Municipal and County Council type. Of 
this latter class the number that comes to Oxford is 
small, but in respect of special endowments it is well 
provided for. " The provision made, firstly by Scholar- 
ships from Elementary or Secondary Schools, and later 
on by Town or County Council Scholarships, by College 
or City Company Exhibitions, and by private generosity, 
is very considerable." 2 

Teachers in Elementary and Secondary Schools are a 
class for whom a special effort ought to be made. " The 

1 lb. pp. 62-66. 2 lb. p. 67. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 245 

University can undertake no niore honourable duty than 
the education of those who will mould the thought of 
the future. More encouragement might be given to 
both grades by Scholarships or Exhibitions, but the 
real obstacle in the path of teacher-students who are 
proceeding to a degree is compulsory Greek in Respon- 
sions." 1 

But it may be that in spite of subsidies there are 
features in the Oxford system which act as a deterrent to 
the entry of poor students, and which it might be possible 
to alleviate or remove. They may relate to (a) the cost of 
living in Colleges, (b) the incidence of University and 
College Fees and Dues, (c) the distribution of Endowments, 
or (d) the nature and subjects of Examinations. All these 
Lord Curzon now proceeds to consider. 

Cost of Living in Colleges. 

" This is one of the oldest of complaints." Since 1850 
the outlay has been in many ways reduced by the better 
arrangements now made by the Colleges. Keble (where 
all meals are in common) makes a fixed annual charge 
of £85. The minimum cost at which a careful under- 
graduate can reside in the majority of Colleges is £100 per 
annum. To this, from £8 to £11 a year should be added 
for clubs, fees and dues, and tips to servants. These esti- 
mates exclude the cost of living in vacations, travelling, 
clothes, books, pocket-money, wine and tobacco. " Many 
proposals have been made for curtailing the expenditure 
thrown upon poor men by living in College. It has been 
suggested that two or three Colleges might be thrown 
into one, with the result of a considerable saving in 
respect of College officers and servants ; or that existing 
Colleges should be remodelled so as to provide single 
rooms, instead of sets of rooms, for the average under- 
graduate, or that the less wealthy Colleges should shut 
their doors against well-to-do students. . . More fruit- 
ful appears to me to be the suggestion that there should 
be a conference of College Domestic Bursars to discuss 
the management of College kitchens, maintenance charges 
in general, and the purchase of supx^lies." 2 



i 16. pp. 68, 69. 2 lb. pp. 70, 71. 



246 



UNIVERSITY REFORM. 



£ s. 


a. 


3 10 





... ±'8 to 9 





7 10 





12 






Fees and Dues. 

For an undergraduate taking the B.A. followed by 
the M.A. degree, these are as follows : — 

(a) University Fees. 
Admission Fee, paid at Matriculation 
Average Fees for all Examinations 
Admission to B.A. Degree 
Admission to M.A. Degree 

£31 or £32 
(b) University Dues (paid through Colleges)- 
12s. 6d. per quarter or £2 10s. Od. per annum 
for a four years' course (though less for a 
shorter course) 10 

(c) College Fees. 

Admission Fee, usually 5 00 

Admission to B.A. Degree, average 3 14 6 

Admission to M.A. Degree, average 4 9 6 

(d) Life Membership. 

(i.) University Dues : per annum 10 

or Composition Charge, according to age, 

from 15 15 

Recovery of right of voting in Convoca- 
tion, after removal of name from College 
books 10 

(ii.) College Dues : per annum ... 14s. to 10 

Composition Charge, according to age, 

from about 15 15 

In these items Caution-money is not included, usually 
about £30, nor Tuition charges, as a rule from £22 to £25 
per annum. Fees and Dues are one of the main sources 
of University income, the University receiving from them 
in 1906, £37,892; in 1907, £38,954; and in 1908, £40,678. 
From Admission and Degree Fees the nineteen Colleges, 
whose accounts are published annually, received in 
1907 an income of £6,900. Lord Curzon thinks there is 
room for reduction in these amounts. 1 



l 16. p. 73. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 247 

Chapter IV. Scholarships and Exhibitions, Fellowships. 

Scholarships and Exhibitions given by Colleges may 
be distinguished according to the subject in which they 
are awarded : — 



Classics 


Scholarships. 


Exhibitions. 


No. given 
yearly. 


Total No. 


No. given 
Yearly. 


Total No. 


75 


300 


30 


120 


Mathematics ... 


151 


62 


5i 


22 


Science... 


14 


56 


13 


52 


History 


Uh 


58 


6* 


26 


Other Subjects 


7 


23 


2i 


10 


Total 


126 


504 


57 i 


230 



" The most noteworthy features of the above table 
are (a) the predominance of the Classics, (6) the meagre 
place conceded to ' other subjects.' . . The contents of 
this category are Music, Divinity, the Indian Civil 
Service and Research. It will thus be seen how small 
a portion of the outer field of learning is at present 
touched by the Oxford Scholarship System." ' 

It appears that many restrictions to particular 
districts or institutions still exist at Oxford. The 
number of Scholarships and Exhibitions with a local 
restriction is 



Scholarships. 


Exhibitions. 


No. given 
yearly. 


Total No. 


No. given 
yearly. 


Total No. 


S0h 


122 


161 


66 



The total sums paid out by Colleges in Scholarships 
and Exhibitions in 1907 was £52,890 15s. 10*d. 

1 16. p. 73. 



248 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Scholars at all the Oxford Colleges wear the Scholar's 
gown, and in some Colleges dine at a separate or Scholars' 
table in Hall. The Scholar's gown " is regarded, and in 
some Colleges envied, as a mark of intellectual distinction. 
This is a significant and most healthy symptom." ' 

The total sum given in Scholarships and Exhibitions 
that is explicitly limited by Statute either to poor schools 
or poor men as ascertained by a Tutors' Committee was : 





Annual Amount. 


No. of Men. 


Poor schools 


£4,400 


60 


Poor men 


£8,800 


120 



" The provision of Scholarships is not meagre, and it 
is supplemented by grants from private funds and the 
Exhibition Fund — known to few but the recipient and the 
College authorities— which amount collectively to a very 
substantial additional endowment of poverty. 

" Nevertheless the system is the subject of much criti- 
cism, which it behoves us to consider." 2 The chief com- 
plaints are four : — 

(1) A large proportion of the Scholarships are held 
by men who do not need them. 

(2) The competitive examinations for Scholarships 
promote an unhealthy rivalry between the Schools and 
lead to an undignified scramble between the Colleges for 
the best men. 

(3) There is no University policy. as to the subjects 
for Scholarship examinations, or as to the standard of 
attainment required. 

(4) The great predominance of Classical Scholarships 
gives an undue advantage to the large Public Schools, and 
penalizes the newer Secondary Schools. 

As for (1), Lord Curzon adduces figures to show that 
Bishop Gore was above the mark when he said that two 
out of five of the Scholars of Oxford do not need their 
emoluments for their education. From 10 to 6 per cent, 
would be a more accurate estimate. " This is not 
tantamount to saying that the great majority of Oxford 
Scholarships are held by the positively poor. . . The 
majority of Oxford Scholars are the sons of professional 
men, with incomes of varying amounts. A Scholarship 

1 lb. p. 80. 2 lb. p. 82. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 249 

or an Exhibition is often the means of enabling the 
father of such a man to give a better education to his 
other children, and the man himself to enjoy that margin 
of amenity at the University which permits him to 
associate with his fellows without any sense of humili- 
ation, and to reap from Oxford society some of its most 
valuable benefits. Such a man is not of course a pauper; 
but his presence at Oxford, and the influence exerted upon 
him, are probably not less beneficial to the community 
than w r Ould have been the case w 7 ith the working-man or 
the artisan Avhom he is popularly supposed to have kept 
out." l 

Lord Curzon thinks the real answer to the question 
is to be found in the much larger issue, w T hether Scholar- 
ships ought to be regarded as subsidies to poverty or 
prizes for intellectual achievement. He examines various 
suggestions which have been made. The first — to do away 
with Prize Scholarships — would lead to the rapid deterio- 
ration of the intellectual standard. Another set of 
reformers would revive the " close " Scholarship system. 
But this is obviously impracticable. A third set would 
divide Scholarships into (1) Honorary, to be competed for 
by the well-to-do, and (2) eleemosynary, to be competed 
for or enjoyed by the poor. Lord Curzon rejects all 
these plans. His conclusion is that " in any serious 
attempt to vary the emoluments of Oxford Scholarships, 
obstacles of law as well as moral scruples have to be 
encountered, co-operation between a large number of 
Colleges is almost essential to ensure success, and with- 
out an agreement betw r een Oxford and Cambridge no very 
considerable or far-reaching change can be hoped for." 2 

The second and third charges "contain much. truth, 
although they are only part of the wider arraignment 
that may be directed against the system of competitive 
examinations at large." A definite suggestion, however, 
has been made for obviating the least desirable features 
of the annual competition. " It is that the whole of the 
Scholarships should be pooled, and should be awarded by 
examinations held two or three times a year by the 
School Examination Delegacy, or by a specially appointed 

l lb. pp. 83, 84. 2 lb. p. 87. 



250 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

University Board. The scholars would be distributed 
among the various Colleges, both Colleges and candidates 
being allowed some liberty of choice — an extension, in 
fact, of the system already adopted in the combined 
College Examinations." ' Lord Curzon rejects this 
solution also. In his view " the weak point in the 
present system is the fact that owing to the great number 
of Scholarships that are given for Classics (a system that 
has its roots in the close connexion between the older 
Universities and the chief Public Schools) the prizes are 
in excess of the candidates worthy to win them. . . 
When we see that places in the Third and even the 
Fourth Class in Honour Moderations are taken by 
wearers of the Scholar's gown, the mischief must lie 
deeper than in the manner or method of examination 
alone. My own solution of the Scholarship difficulty is 
. . . a redistribution of our Scholarships and Exhi- 
bitions on a broad and systematic scale." 2 

Lord Curzon's redistribution scheme is as follows : — 
" A list will perhaps best indicate the subjects in 
which Scholarships and Exhibitions would be eagerly 
welcomed, if they were forthcoming. 

A. For the encouragement of the Poor. 

(i.) The Non-Collegiate system. 

(ii.) Buskin College, 
(iii.) A new Working-men's College, 
(iv.) At ordinary Colleges. 

(v.) Elementary and Secondary School Teachers. 

B. For English Literature, 

C. For Modern Languages. 

D. For Post-Graduate Study or Besearch. 

E. For subjects (other than Classics) included in any 
of the University courses, 

F. For University Scholarships, should the pre- 
viously discussed experiment be thought desirable and 
a certain number of College Scholarships be placed at the 
disposal of the University for distribution between the 
Colleges after a University Examination." 3 

Possible methods of carrying out this scheme are 
then examined. 






l lb. pp. 88, 89. 2 lb. pp. 90, 91. 3 lb. pp. 91, 92. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 251 

Felloivsliips. 
Lord Curzon gives a brief history of Fellowships, 
noting that " Prize Fellowships were earnestly advocated 
by Jowett and others, on the grounds that they would 
provide (a) a reward of ability, (b) an opportunity for 
independent study, (c) a stepping-stone to professional 
careers, and (d) a link between the residents of Oxford 
and the outside world." ' The Commissioners of 1877-1882 
created three classes of Fellows at Oxford, viz. : — 

I. Professorial Fellows, i.e. Fellowships attached to 
University Professorships ; 

II. Official or Tutorial Fellows, i.e. Fellowships held 
by the Educational Staff of the College ; 

III. Ordinary, often popularly called Prize Fellows. 
The Prize Fellow was not to have more than a certain 

income (generally £500 a year) ; he was (after a year of 
probation) under no obligation to reside, or to serve his 
College in any capacity ; he received £200 a year for seven 
years. These Fellowships are awarded after a special 
' Fellowship examination. 

Financial difficulties have prevented the scheme of 
the Commissioners from being carried into full execution. 
At the present time there are 315 Fellows of Oxford 
Colleges (including the Professor-Fellows and the Canons 
of Christ Church) of whom a little more than 220, or 70 
per cent., are on the Collegiate Staff, or are engaged in 
University or College work. A certain number of Fellows 
on the Old Foundation (i.e. before 1877, and even before 
1850) still survive. The total amount that appeared in 
the College Accounts for 1907 as having been paid to 
Fellows was £'61,550 19s. lOd. This did not include the 
Fellowships of the Professor-Fellows or a considerable 
portion of the £20,352 13s. 2d. paid to the Professors, nor 
the sums paid under independent trusts to the Fellows of 
Hertford, Balliol, and Oriel. The modern tendency of 
feeling is against Prize Fellowships. There is " an 
increasing desire that the endowments of Oxford shall 
be devoted to the direct and immediate service of the 
University whether inside or outside it ; that neither 
intellectual merit nor political distinction shall create 

i lb. p. 94. 



252 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

any claim to participation in them unless it accepts 
this obligation." ' Lord Curzon believes in Prize Fellow- 
ships so far as they form a link between Oxford and the 
outside world. " For myself," he adds, " I would like to 
see, as in the case of Scholarships, an examination of the 
entire system of Fellowships and their allocation on more 
scientific and harmonious lines. At present a College 
may assign one of its Ordinary Fellowships to any pur- 
pose agreeable to itself, provided that it is in conformity 
with the Statutes; and it is naturally guided, in doing so, 
firstly by the interests or requirements of the College, and 
only secondarily by those of the University. Without 
infringing this principle, good might result from more 
consultation and from an attempt, renewed from time to 
time, to map out the entire area of University and College 
requirements, and to distribute this imposing income in 
the manner best calculated to promote the advancement 
of learning. One College might promise a Fellowship for 
one subject, another for another; there would be method 
instead of accident, and co-operation in place of caprice. 
In this way large gaps in University teaching might by 
degrees be filled. Fellowships might be provided for 
University Extension, or for Tutorial work among Non- 
Collegiate students and in Working-Men's Colleges and 
Halls ; and a definite scheme might be constructed of 
Research Fellowships, spread over the whole field of 
advanced studies." 2 

Lord Curzon then passes on to 

Chapter V. University Examinations. 

He would do away with compulsory Greek in Respon- 
sions, the Oxford Previous Examination, or Little-go. 
As for Responsions, it is " half an Entrance Examination 
and half not, and is as unsuitable, in its methods and 
subjects, for the former object as it is ill-adapted for a 
University Preliminary Examination." 3 There is no 
University Entrance Examination. " A test for admis- 
sion to its privileges is a matter from which the Univer- 
sity deliberately dissociates itself. . . It is the Colleges 
who have been conceded or have acquired the power of 
deciding who shall or shall not be members of the 

i lb. p. 97. 2 lb. pp. 99, 100. 3 lb. p. 107. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 253 

University. . . Oxford and Cambridge are, I believe, 
the only Universities in the world in which this system 
prevails. It has grown up because of the circumstances 
in which the Colleges themselves grew up, and because 
throughout their joint history there has never been any 
clear division between the functions of the University 
and those of the Colleges, the latter being corporate 
bodies with their own laws and regulations, separate 
from, and in most respects independent of the University. 
It is much as though Eton and Harrow were to admit 
boys to membership, not upon an Entrance Examination 
conducted by themselves, but upon whatever exam, each 
of the house-masters might choose to enforce for his in- 
dividual house. The result is, firstly, that the University 
has no voice in determining the conditions of its own 
membership ; secondly, that there is a wide variety of 
standard created by the Colleges. A man who is rejected 
at one College may even pass on and obtain admission at 
another, the scale of requirement descending in proportion 
to the character and reputation of the College. So startling 
an anomaly could not escape the notice of the first Com- 
mission, and one of the many wise recommendations 
made by them, but unhappily disregarded, was the 
institution of a University Matriculation Examination." 1 
The machinery for holding this examination now exists 
(at any rate in outline) whereas fifty years ago it would 
have had to be created. " I allude of course to the 
system of examinations and certificates as conducted by 
the Local Examination Delegacy, and the Delegacy for 
the Inspection and Examination of Schools, which is the 
Oxford half of the Oxford and Cambridge Joint Exam- 
ination Board." 2 Lord Curzon favours "a universal and 
elastic system of School-leaving examinations, conducted 
by the Universities in consultation with the Government 
and the masters of Secondary Schools." 3 

The Pass-Man and Pass-Schools. 

As for the much-abused Pass-man, Lord Curzon holds 

that "it is part of the function of Oxford to educate him; 

and that, if it is to continue to deserve the name of a 

University, it has few more important duties to perform 

i lb. pp. 108, 109. 2 lb. p. 111. 3 lb. p. 112. 



254 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

than to give a good general education to the man of birth 
and means (' Spurn not the nobly born,' we are told once 
more). . . It is not necessary, accordingly, to take up 
the position — though it is true — that without the Pass- 
man, Oxford would not be able to pay its way. . . It is 
worthy of consideration whether a wider range of alterna- 
tives, guiding the Pass-man into practical courses and 
offering a greater stimulus to his intelligence, might not 
be discovered." 1 

A Business Education. 
"There is one subject in which I should like to see 
the University interest itself, namely, the creation of 
special facilities for the education of business men. . . 
I should like to see a substantial two years' course with 
instruction in Modern History, Commercial Geography, 
Political Economy, the methods of Accounting, and the 
principles of Exchange, culminating in a Diploma, 
specially constructed for the requirements of a business 
career." 2 

Chapter VI. Relations of the Colleges and the University — 
Organisation of Teaching. 

In Chapter VI., which deals with the above topics, 
Lord Curzon comes to the heart of his subject. The chief 
work done at Oxford and Cambridge is that of teaching. 
It is divided between the University and the Colleges, 
and that not according to a carefully considered system, 
but haphazard, as things have chanced to shape themselves. 
Again, teaching cannot be given without being paid for. 
Thus a double set of problems is raised of (1) the educa- 
tional relations, and (2) the financial relations between 
the Universities and the Colleges. Lord Curzon there- 
fore is entirely in the right when he describes the 
subject of this chapter as " the most difficult of aca- 
demic problems, viz. the reconcilement of the Colleges 
with the University, and of the Tutorial with the Pro- 
fessorial system." " First called attention to by the 
writings of Sir William Hamilton in 1831. it loomed large 
before the Commissioners of 1850. Page after page of 
their report testifies to their anxiety concerning the 

i lb. pp. 117, 118. 2 lb. p. 118. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 255 

readjustment of these relations. Such phrases as 'the 
Colleges have absorbed the University and drawn to 
themselves its functions,' 'the Tutors have become the 
sole authorised teachers of the University,' 'the monopoly 
of the Colleges,' and ' the University must be restored to 
its proper superiority,' occur with impressive frequency, 
and were employed by the Commission to justify the 
majority of their reforms — for instance, the reorganiza- 
tion and re-endowment of the Professoriate, the liberation 
of Fellowships and Scholarships, and the creation of the 
Unattached Students. The duty of the Colleges to the 
University was carried a step further in the financial 
measures ordered by the Commission of 1877, and in the 
creation of the Common University Fund ; while the 
better organisation of studies and control of examinations 
under the eye of the Professors was believed to be pro- 
vided for by the Boards of Faculties and Boards of Studies 
that were simultaneously called into being. 

" Since the reforms of 1882 there has on the whole 
been a steady, though often unrecognised, progress in the 
direction of strengthening the University. The increase 
in the number of Professors and other University Teachers 
has been especially striking ; their number, as given in 
the Calendar for 1908, being 110. Of these, 9 represent 
Theology, 7 Law, 31 Medicine, Natural Science, and 
Mathematics, and 63 Arts and Letters. Their stipends, 
paid by the University and the Colleges (apart from fees) 
amount to £10,000 per annum. They divide the instruc- 
tion of the University with the College Tutors and 
Lecturers, of whom there are about 150, and who are 
remunerated partly by College Fellowships, partly by 
contributions from the College Tuition Funds. The 
presence of so many Professors on the Governing Bodies 
of the Colleges also gives the University a direct voice, 
which formerly did not exist, in Collegiate administration 
and instruction. 

"Nevertheless the complaint that the Colleges still 
dominate the Universities has been actively revived, and 
is in the forefront of every call for University reform. 
This is due partly to the great improvements that have 
taken place in the Tutorial system, enhancing its utility 
and influence and practically extinguishing the once 



256 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

flourishing* system of private Tutors and Coaches ; partly 
to the Inter-Collegiate system of Lectures that has enabled 
the Colleges to concentrate their instruction and sweep 
large numbers of men into their Lecture-rooms ; and 
partly to the rapid development of knowledge and sub- 
division of its branches, for dealing with which the 
Colleges possess an unrivalled organisation ready to 
hand. Accordingly it is once again represented that 
the University is not master in its own house, and 
does not adequately control its own teaching. The 
commonest form in which the complaint arises is as 
follows. A College appoints A or B to be a Lecturer 
because he is a Fellow, or appoints him a Lecturer 
and then gives him a Fellowship. Straightway he 
becomes a University Lecturer, without being required 
to furnish any proof of his qualifications ; and he con- 
tinues to be one, the Boards of Faculties, who are 
supposed to control the Lecture-list when submitted to 
them, failing to exercise any real supervision. This, it 
is pointed out, is unsatisfactory to all parties ; to the 
University because its staff has been increased without 
its knowledge or consent ; to the College because it is 
furnishing from its own staff an officer, who, though 
paid exclusively by itself, is doing outside work ; to the 
Tutor because he receives no return for his service to the 
University; and to the system of instruction at large 
because too many lecturers are apt to be appointed, 
too many of them lecture on the same subject, and (it 
is said) too many lecture who cannot lecture at all." 1 
Lord Curzon also points out that " In all classes there 
is manifest the same ungrudging admission of the right 
of the University as a great Teaching Society to control 
the instruction which it offers " ; and adds : "It is not in 
the smaller and newer Faculties, but in the older 
branches of study, and notably in Literae Humaniores; 
that the want of co-ordination and the lack of control 
are most urgently felt." 2 

Boards of Faculties. 
By the Statutes of 1882, Tit. V., a Faculty was 
thus defined : " In and for the purpose of this Statute, 

i lb. pp. 121, 122. 2 lb. pp. 123, 124. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 257 

the word ' Faculty ' shall denote any branch or aggregate 
of branches of the studies pursued in the University, 
which for the time being shall be represented by a 
separate Board." There are at Oxford seven Faculties 
and seven Boards of Faculties, and these Boards control 
the studies they represent so far as they are controlled. 
"By the same Statute, six Boards of Studies were 
constituted for the supervision of certain stated examin- 
ations, these being composed of representatives drawn 
from the Boards of Faculties. These bodies in com- 
bination are thus invested by law with the control of all 
the examinations of the University, and with the 
supervision of its entire scheme of lectures, University 
and College." 1 

The criticisms passed on these Boards are (1) that 
they are not representative of University teaching; (2) 
that they pay excessive regard to examinations, and are 
in reality Examination Boards rather than Faculties 
representing subjects ; (3) that they exercise no real 
control over the lectures, merely registering where they 
ought to revise ; (4) they are impotent because the 
Professors are liable to be outvoted by the College 
Tutors, and thus the latter really control the University 
curriculum. 

Proposed Reforms. 
Lord Curzon here distinguishes three schools of 
reformers. " First are those who are quite willing that 
the Boards should be reconstituted, and if necessary 
increased, but who hold that they are already empowered 
to establish the requisite control over University 
teaching." a " Next are those who hold that there should 
be created a clear distinction between the two classes of 
teachers : (1) University lecturers, and (2) College 
teachers ; that the former should be a recognised status 
conferred by the University alone, freely, but on a definite 
system ; and that the Colleges, in filling up their 
Fellowships and Tutorships, should enter into consul- 
tation with the University as to the manner of man to be 
appointed, if he is to merit admission to the University 
list. . . This would be, in fact, to give the University 

i lb. p. 126. 2 16. p. 129. 



258 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

a veto on College appointments. . , The third and last 
scheme proposes that a Central Board or Council of 
Faculties should absorb the Common University Fund, 
and that it should further be charged with the appoint- 
ment and payment of all University Lecturers, and of all 
Professors and Readers where not otherwise provided for, 
the regulation of all matters relating to the studies and 
examinations of the University ; and the admission of new 
or the subdivision of old Faculties." 1 

Lord Curzon concludes: "It should not be out of the 
power of Council by a careful comparison of the good 
points of the many plans in existence, to evolve some 
method of placing the relations of the University and the 
Colleges on a more stable footing. Perhaps the Common 
University Fund might be rendered more representative 
of the Faculties if its operations and powers were safe- 
guarded in the manner which will be hereafter proposed. 
There would still remain the question of the reorganisa- 
tion of the University studies as a whole, and of the 
examinations by which they are tested." 2 But this last is 
a subject raising such large and complicated issues that 
Lord Curzon excuses himself from entering on it. 

College Statutes. 

The University of Oxford has appointed a Standing 
Committee of the Council to examine all College Statutes 
which are brought before the Privy Council with a 
view to protecting the interests of the University. 
"This is a step in advance, but it remains to be seen 
whether the University has adopted sufficient guarantees 
to ensure that its own interests are in no way impaired." 3 

Chapter VII., on the Revenue, Expenditure and 
Financial Administration of the University, is dealt with 
later on in Chapter XI. of this book. 

Chapter VIII.— Executive Machinery of University 
Government. 

" The organisation of the University suffers from 
many defects which impair its efficiency, and breed con- 
fusion and delay. Perhaps the most conspicuous instance 
of this lack of system is presented by the Executive 

l lb. pp. 129-136. - lb. pp. 138, 139. 3 lb. p. 134. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 259 

Machinery of the University.. It might be expected that 
it would at least possess, in the staff of officials who 
manage its business, and in the office where their records 
are kept and their business is done, an adequate and 
efficient machinery. Such is very far from being the 
case." ' 

The Vice -Chancellor. 

"In olden days the M.A.'s elected their own Vice- 
Chancellor; but in 1636 this power was transferred to the 
Chancellor, Avho now annually nominates the Vice- 
Chancellor as his deputy from among the Heads of Houses 
in the order of their election as Head, usually for four 
successive years. . . 

" The duties of this officer are overwhelming in their 
number and complexity. He presides over Council, the 
two Congregations, and Convocation. . . He is a mem- 
ber of every Board, Delegacy and Committee in the 
University. . . These facts have prompted two sugges- 
tions. One is that the Chancellor should be empowered 
to appoint as his deputy some independent and leisured 
person, who should devote his entire time and abilities to 
University work. . . The other suggestion is that the 
Chancellor should choose from a list submitted to him by 
the Hebdomadal Council. . . There does not appear to 
be sufficient reason for discussing any revolutionary 
change. The real reform lies not in altering the choice of 
the man so much as in reducing and systematising his 
work." 2 

The University Staff. 

This consists of a Registrar, an Assistant Registrar, 
and a Secretary to the Curators of the Chest. Lord 
Curzon advises the institution of a University Office with 
a University Secretariat or Staff. " Whether such a pro- 
vision should be made by a development of the existing 
Registrar's Office, or by entirely new arrangements, is a 
matter which the Council will be well qualified to decide." 
A University Architect and a Clerk of the Works would 
also be required. 3 

Finally Lord Curzon says : " I may be permitted to 
remark that in the multiplicity of Boards and Delegacies, 

i lb. p. 172. 2 lb. pp. 172-175. 3 lb. pp. 175-177. 



260 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

by which the University endeavours to cope with its 
tremendous task, lies an inevitable source of much delay 
and dissipation of energy, which a more centralised and 
scientific organisation might prevent; . . even if the 
University cannot reduce the number of these agencies, 
at least it should insist that its executive committee, 
the Hebdomadal Council, shall bring these bodies into 
closer relation with itself, and shall exercise a more 
harmonising, and therefore a more effective, control over 
their operations." ' 

Chapter IX. Encouragement of Research. 

The encouragement of Research finds no place in the 
recommendations of the Commission of 1850. Matthew 
Arnold was the pioneer of the movement in its favour. 
He was followed by Mark Pattison and Jowett, and the 
Common University Fund of the 1877-82 Commission 
was the result, being designed to encourage teaching and 
study outside the ordinary curriculum, and having its 
objects specifically defined as Instruction and Research. 

Lord Curzon argues that the main function of Oxford 
must be to teach, and that it is impossible for it to 
emulate either a University like the Johns Hopkins at 
Baltimore, which exists for post-graduate study only ; 
or like Harvard, which has more than 350 post-graduate 
students in Arts. Still it is a duty to provide for it. 

Facilities for Advanced Study. 
The facilities for Advanced Study are then enumer- 
ated — the Fellowships and Scholarships, the Prizes, the 
Diplomas, the B.C.L., the new Degrees of B.Litt. and 
B.Sc, the Libraries and Seminars, the Laboratories, and 
the publications of the Clarendon Press. All these things 
point to a great advance. " At the same time it is only 
too true that the amount of original work as yet turned 
out from Oxford is inconsiderable. . . 

A University Policy of Research. 
In the first place I am not aware that the question 
of its attitude toward Research has ever been considered 
by the University as a whole, i.e. by the University 
and Colleges in combination. Might it not be a 

1 lb. p. 178. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 261 

good thing if the resources of the two partners 
that may be available for the purpose were compared 
and co-ordinated, and if a plan were to be worked out 
by which each member of the federation should contri- 
bute, according to its means and inclination, to the 
common end'? It might be a function of the Central 
Board of Finance to take early counsel with the Uni- 
versity and Colleges in this matter; or Council itself 
might undertake the labour or delegate it to one of its 
Committees." ' 

Chapter X. Independent Subjects. 
Lord Curzon here turns to a number of independent 
subjects — Election to Professorships, where he suggests 
various improvements ; a Pension Fund for the Profes- 
soriate ; Degrees for Women ; the Conferment of Honor- 
ary Degrees ; a three-years' Honour Course ; a longer 
Academical year ; and the Indian Institute. 

Chapter XI. Summary. 

Finally, the writer summarises his suggestions, point- 
ing out that " a fourfold duty lies on the University : (1) 
to provide the best teaching over the entire field of know- 
ledge of which its own resources and the progress of 
science may admit ; (2) to offer this teaching to the widest 
range of students ; (3) to mould and shape them not 
merely by the training of intellect but by the discipline 
of spirit ; and (4) to extend by original inquiry the 
frontiers of learning." 2 

Lord Curzon has laid his finger on the weak spots 
in the Oxford system, but he indicates rather the direc- 
tion which reforms must take, than the ultimate reforms 
themselves. At the same time he is to be congratulated 
on the success which certain of his suggestions have 
already met with. 

We now come to the latest suggestions from Cam- 
bridge. Early in the Easter Term of 1909, a memorial 
was received by the Council of the Senate from certain 
resident members of the University requesting that 
various questions, connected with the constitution and the 
government of the University, and with the relations of 
the Colleges to the University and to one another, should 

i lb. p. 186. 2 lb. p. 210. 



262 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

be taken into consideration. 1 Reports were annexed to 
the memorial. These Reports were the outcome of a 
series of unofficial meetings of members of the Senate ; 
the first of which was held on February 10th, 1908, and 
the last on March 10th, 1900. The above Committee on 
the Constitution and Government of the University 
limited their suggestions in the first instance to two 
questions only : (1) the reconstitution of the Electoral 
Roll ; and (2) the functions of the Senate and the Electoral 
Roll as reconstituted. 

"The object which they have had in view has been 
to suggest a scheme which would give to the body of 
residents engaged in teaching, research, and administra- 
tion, a larger share than it at present possesses in the 
legislative action of the University. The effect of the 
scheme suggested would be to establish two Houses, one 
a body of residents, and the other the Senate as at present 
constituted." 2 In other words, the design was to put 
more power into the hands of those who do the actual 
work of the University and to leave less power in the 
hands of the absentees, a course which has now been 
followed at Oxford. The documents submitted to the 
Council were : (1) a suggested reconstitution of the Elec- 
toral Roll ; (2) suggested alterations in the functions of 
the Senate and of the Electoral Roll as reconstituted, 
with two Appendices ; (3) a report on the constitution 
of the Senate, with a view of effecting the following 
changes : — (a) to diminish as far as practicable the 
charge (£12) at present made for the M.A. or equivalent 
degree, (b) to increase the proportion of graduates who 
are members of the Senate, and (c) to avoid financial 
loss to the University ; (4) a memorandum by Mr. H. 
McLeod Innes on the financial aspect of the degree 
question ; (5) a Report on the relation of the Colleges 
to the University and to one another, divided under 
the following heads : (A) teaching for Honours-Examina- 
tions, (B) contributions of the Colleges to the University, 
and (C) the cost of living at Cambridge. 

The Council decided not to nominate a special 
Syndicate or Syndicates to deal with the matters in 



i University Reporter, 1910, p. 675. 2 Report, p. 2. 



THE LATEST SUGGESTIONS. 263 

question, but in the first instance to undertake the duty 
themselves, and to deal with the constitution and 
government of the University to begin with, leaving the 
second question over till a later date. The Council's 
report was published on February 28, 1910; it was dis- 
cussed in April and May, and an amended report was 
published on June 6, 1910. Its recommendations were 
voted on in the October term and were rejected. In 
consequence of this adverse decision the question of the 
relations of the Colleges to the University and to one 
another has never been officially considered. There was 
a subsequent recommendation to alter the B.A. and M.A. 
degree fees, but this also was rejected, so that this attempt 
to reform Cambridge from within failed completely. No 
change of any kind was made. The various sugges- 
tions of the unofficial Committee are dealt with more 
fully in the last chapter, so that this brief notice must 
not be taken as indicating their real importance. 



CHAPTER XI. 

THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES OF OXFORD 
AND CAMBRIDGE. 

It seems most convenient to deal with the question 
of University finance in a separate chapter. The Com- 
missioners of 1850 nominally dealt with it, hut the 
information they were able to obtain was fragmentary 
and incomplete, especially as regards Oxford. Mark 
Pattison writes l : " The Report of the Commission of 
1852 was defective on the point of finance. Their 
statement (Report, pp. 125-127) of the University income 
and expenditure is not accurate, and on the property and 
revenue of the Colleges they have few data. . . When, 
in 1854, Parliament undertook to transfer a portion of the 
College revenues, it was not only robbing, but robbing in 
the dark." 

The Royal Commission of 1872 was appointed, as has 
been seen, to inquire into the revenues and property of 
the two Universities. It was thus strictly supplementary 
to the inquiry of 1850. Mr. Gladstone, in Pattisonian 
phrase, was determined, if he robbed at all, to rob in the 
daylight. The Report presented in 1874 still remains the 
chief source of information on the matters of which it 
treats. 

The following is the account therein given of the 
origin of University and College property 2 : — 

" The properties of the Universities have for the most 
part arisen from gifts entrusted to them for specific 
purposes. 

" The Colleges which were first established in the 13th 
century received from their founders an endowment of 

i Suggestions, pp. 51, 52. 2 Report, pp. 25, 26. 



THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 265 

manors, lands, and houses, generally to an extent that 
was barely adequate to provide the payments and expenses 
of maintenance which were directed to be allowed by the 
Statutes. Subsequently were added impropriations of 
rectories, with their tithe property, in some cases for a 
period of years to meet the first expenses of the College 
fabric, in others as a permanent annexation to the 
foundation. The larger Colleges in both Universities 
were not established until the 14th and 15th centuries, 
when the suppression of the alien Priories offered the 
means of devoting much ecclesiastical property to 
academical purposes. It was not an uncommon method 
of founding a College that a founder should, with the 
sanction of the Crown and the authority of the Church, 
acquire both the site and the estates of some religious 
house in Oxford or Cambridge which had perhaps fallen 
into disrepute or decay, obtain its formal dissolution, and 
establish his own College in its stead. The dissolution of 
the monasteries in the reign of Henry VIII. became the 
occasion for diverting a still larger amount of ecclesi- 
astical and other property, more particularly of 
impropriate tithes, to Collegiate uses. In the times 
subsequent to the Reformation considerable accretions of 
endowment have been made to Colleges which were 
already founded with the view of promoting the 
education of future ministers of the Church, of furnish- 
ing educational encouragement for particular schools, 
districts, or families, of providing a more liberal 
maintenance for the members of the society, or generally 
of expressing the goodwill and affectionate regard of the 
benefactor for the particular House of which, perhaps, he 
had himself been a member, it may be a recipient of its 
bounty. 

" There are not wanting examples of additions to the 
several foundations having been occasioned in the earliest 
times by a desire to encourage special studies and pro- 
fessional pursuits; but when it was the object of the 
founder to introduce or to promote some new branch 
of learning or science, it was the more usual practice 
for him to confide his gift to the care of the University 
at large, rather than of an individual College." 

The Commissioners continue : — 



266 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

" From these various sources there has grown up 
a large mass of property which for the purposes of our 
inquiry we have arranged under six heads, viz. : — (1) 
Lands; (2) House Property; (3) Tithe Rent Charges; 
(4) Other Rent Charges, such as fee farm rents and fixed 1 
charges ; (5) Stocks, Shares and other Securities of aa 
similar kind; and (6) Other Properties, such as fines & 
and other profits from copyholds of inheritance, minerals,- 
timber, etc." 

The Commissioners considered that it would be bestf 
to conduct their inquiry by means of written rather than 
of oral evidence. Forms were therefore sent out arranged 
under sixteen heads. In the Returns and Abstracts- 
prepared from them, properties and income held andi 
enjoyed for corporate use were distinguished by thei 
letter A, and those held subject to special trusts by\ 
the letter B. The Universities, the Colleges, and all 
their officers, with a few exceptions, supplied the infor- 
mation asked for. But, add the Commissioners: — "We 
regret to say that Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, 
failed to give the required information. The Fellows 
of the College indeed expressed their willingness that i 
the information should be given, but as the Master i 
discharges the duties of Bursar, and has the College' 
account-books in his custody, the Fellows had not the 1 
means which would enable them to make the necessary 
returns." 1 

As for Trusts, the Commissioners report : — " Our I 
attention has been specially called to the properties heldi 
in trust by the University and the Colleges. There are* 
only a very few cases in which the beneficial interest of 
the trust property is wholly external to the University or 
College which holds the trust. In almost all cases the 
trustee-corporation has a beneficial interest either: 
contingent or partial in the trust estate. The objects of> 
the trusts are almost universally one or other of the: 
following: — The maintenance of or aid towards a 
Professorship, Teachership, or Lectureship, or some 
institution for the encouragement of Literature, Science, 
or Art ; Scholarships or Exhibitions in the Universities 
or some College, those attached to Colleges being 

i lb. p. 24. 



THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 207 

frequently accompanied with a condition of preference 
i for some candidates from some school or district, with a 
power to the College to elect by open competition in case 
no properly qualified candidate presents himself ; prizes ; 
the purchase of ecclesiastical benefices, and the improve- 
ment of the benefices which are in the gift of the College. 
; Many benefactions have been made in times past for the 
; common benefit of all or some members of the foundation 
of a College. Many special foundations for Fellowships 
i and Scholarships have also been established in all 
respects similar to the Fellows and Scholars on the 
original foundation, with this important exception, viz., 
that the Fellows were not members of the Corporation, 
and generally had no voice in the management of the 
College. To remedy this disability, and to give to all 
, common interests, the Commissioners appointed under 
the University Reform Acts of 1854 and 1856, in the 
exercise of the powers given to them, consolidated these 
I bye-foundations with the original foundations of the 
College, and fused the property and income. The result 
|of this consolidation was a very large reduction in the 
number of the Trust Funds of the Colleges. In some 
i instances, however, Trust Funds of a mixed character 
[could not be treated in this manner; and they still 
remain subject to separate and distinct administration 
; : and account. 

" It may be observed that though these funds are not 
divisible among the Head and Fellows of a College, yet in 
; many cases they indirectly increase the divisible revenue, 
inasmuch as they bear charges for chapel, library, repairs 
'and the like, which would otherwise fall on the general 
.funds of the College." ! 

After these preliminary remarks, the Commissioners 
proceed to consider, — 

I. The Property of the Universities and Colleges on 
1st January, 1872. 

II. The Income of the Universities and Colleges in 
the year 1871. 

III. The Expenditure of the Universities and Colleges 
in the year 1871. 



i Report, pp. 24, 25. 



268 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

I. Property of the Universities and Colleges 
on 1st January, 1872. 

To take the six heads given above. 

(1) Lands. 

The landed estates comprise 319,718 acres distributed 
throughout the whole of England and Wales, but situated 
in larger quantities in the southern than in the northern 
counties. Of these 

7,683 acres belong to the University of Oxford. 
2,445 „ „ „ „ „ Cambridge. 

184,764 „ „ „ Colleges and Halls of Oxford. 

124,826 „ „ „ „ of Cambridge. 

Part of these lands is let on what are called beneficial 
leases, which form of tenure the Commissioners thus 
explain : — 

" Its distinctive feature is this, that only a small part, 
in most cases only a nominal part of the annual value of 
the property leased is represented in the form of yearly 
rent, the remainder being paid for by the lessee in the 
way of fine, foregift, or premium, and that at fixed periods 
in anticipation of the term in respect of which this 
peculiar payment is made. . - In other words, the 
leases are at the times indicated restored to the full term 
of lives or years for which they were originally granted in 
consideration of a payment (called a fine) which may be 
regarded as the purchase-money of a term in reversion 
commencing at the expiration of the 14 or 26 years still 
remaining in the lease. The result of this system is that 
the yearly income of the College is uncertain and 
precarious, and that at all times a large part of 
the fee-simple value of the estate under beneficial 
lease is the property of the lessee, and must virtually 
be bought back before the College can enjoy the 
full annual value." 1 This form of leasing is strongly 
condemned both for lands and houses. The Act of 
1877, section 21 (4) enacts that the Commissioners 
appointed by the Act may " make provision for regulating 
the conditions under which beneficial leases may be 
renewed by the University or a College." But the 
Commissioners, so far as I can find, never made any 
Statute to this effect. 

l lb. p. 26. 



the financial resources. 269 

(2) House Property. 

Annual Income (less fixed charges) ' : — 

£ s. d. 

University of Oxford 1,162 14 2 

University of Cambridge 1-56 10 

Colleges of Oxford 34,152 15 8 

Colleges of Cambridge 54,286 1 1 

(3) Tithe Rent-charges. 

The Universities and Colleges held Tithe Rent-charges 
to the following amounts 2 : — 

£ s. d. 

University of Oxford 1,244 10 10 

University of Cambridge ... 1,741 9 

Colleges and Halls of Oxford 83,238 12 5 

Colleges of Cambridge 63,679 9 5 

(4) Other Rent-charges. 
These are generally small. 

(5) Stocks and Shares. 

The Universities and Colleges hold Stocks and Shares, 
the annual income of which is : — 

£ s. d. 

University of Oxford 13,068 16 10 

University of Cambridge 7,687 5 8 

Colleges and Halls of Oxford 26,426 11 6 

Colleges of Cambridge 19,314 5 7 

(6) Other Properties. 

The chief item is copyholds of inheritance, but it is 
not a large one. The number of benefices in the gift of 
the Universities and Colleges, and the net annual income 
thereof, is returned or estimated as follows : — 

Annual net 





Number. 


Income. 
£ s. d. 


University of Oxford 


5 


1,036 7 


University of Cambridge 


1 


394 


Colleges and Halls of Oxford .. 


439 


187,659 4 3 


Colleges of Cambridge 


311 


135,016 17 11 



II. Income of the Universities and Colleges in the Year 1871. 

The total income of the Universities and Colleges in 

1871 was £754,405 5s. l^d. Of this sum £665,601 10s. 2|d. 

i See p. 29 (Summary). 2 lb. p. 28. 



270 



UNIVERSITY REFORM. 



was for (A) corporate use, and £88,803 14s. lid. was (B) 
subject to conditions of trust, being thus divided 1 :— 



University of Oxford 
University of Cambridge ... 
Colleges and Halls of Oxford 
Colleges of Cambridge 



A 

£ s. d. 

32,151 1 

23,642 19 5 

330,836 16 1 

278,970 13 8£ 



B 

£ s. cl. 
15,437 19 3 
10,407 17 10 
35,417 2 
27,540 17 8 



The revenues arise from two different sources : (1) the 
properties already detailed ; and (2) the room rents, and 
dues and fees paid by the members of the University or 
the Colleges. The former the Commissioners call External 
Income, and the latter Internal Income. 

The following is the conspectus of the whole External 
Income after deducting fixed payments such as Land Tax 
and Tithe Rent-charge : — 









Tithe 




Other 




Lands. 


Houses. 


rent-charg 


es. 


rent-charges. 


University of 


£ s. d. 


£ s. d. 


£ s. 


cl. 


£ s. cl. 


Oxford 


12,083 4 


1,162 14 2 


490 19 


7 


872 6 9 


University of 












Cambridge 


3,148 19 8 


156 10 


1,784 14 


5 


333 16 6 


Colleges & Halls 












of Oxford 


170,990 11 7i 


26,833 6 3 


34,152 15 


8 


4,092 14 10 


Colleges of 












Cambridge 


132,671 6 


25,993 8 2 


54,286 1 


1 


3,943 2 2 




£318,893 12 H 


54,145 18 7 


90,714 10 


9 


9,242 3 



Stocks, 
Shares, &c. 

£ s. d. 
12,939 6 9 


Other 
Properties. 

£ s. d. 
1,494 16 2 


Special endow- 
ment of Head. 
£ s. d. 


Loans. 

£ s. cl. 


Total. 
£ s. d. 
29,043 3 9 


7,648 9 


844 19 2 


— 




13,917 8 9 


24,242 7 lOi 


13,574 14 3 


6,289 6 


27,194 6 2 


307,369 17 2 


16,508 7 5 


20,365 8 8£ 


1,764 9 10 




264,256 17 10fc 


£61,338 11 0| 


36,279 18 3| 


8,053 10 4 


27,194 6 2 


614,587 7 &k 



The Internal Income of the Universities arises almost 
wholly from taxation. 

"At Oxford every member of the University pays Ml 
annually to the University Chest. Those who have been 



l 76. p. 29. 



THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 271 

admitted to the degree of M.A., B.C.L., or B.M., can com- 
pound for these dues by a single payment. These sums 
are invested, and amounted on July 15th, 1871, to £ 14,900 
Consols. Fees are also charged at Matriculation, at all 
Examinations, and on Graduation. The Internal Income 
thus raised in the year ended July 15th, 1878, amounted to 
£18,066 8s. 6d. 

At Cambridge every member of the University pays 
annually a capitation charge of 17s. 1 There is no Uni- 
versity compounding, but the Colleges accept a composi- 
tion both to themselves and to the University. 

The Internal Income of the Colleges arises from rents 
of rooms occupied by members of the College ; from fees 
paid on entrance and graduation; from dues paid by 
all members whether resident or non-resident ; from 
profits of the establishment, chiefly in its buttery and 
kitchen departments ; and from small casual payments. 
The rate at which fees and dues are levied, and the time 
over which they are payable, varies in every College, and 
in some Colleges varies with the different classes of 
students. 

In the matter of internal economy, and consequently 
in that of Internal Income, there is no uniformity of 
practice, and it cannot be said with certainty in all cases 
whether profit, properly so called, accrues to a College 
from its reception of students or not. 2 

Tuition fees are sums of money paid terminally or 
quarterly for tuition and instruction. At Oxford, the 
payment for tuition varies ; it is generally £21 per annum, 
but £25 and £27 are also charged. The amount received 
for these fees was in 1871 £30,761 3s. 4d. To this sum 
additions were made in that year from the corporate and 
trust funds of the Colleges of £4,227 4s. 6d. 

In the University of Cambridge the charge is uniform, 
being £18 a year or £6 a term, for an undergraduate 
pensioner; £2 a term for a sizar, and £1 10s. Od. a term for 
every B.A. "In some cases the fund is treated as a 
private affair of the Tutors, and we have been frequently 

i By a Grace passed June 1st, 1893, this tax has been supplemented 
by a quarterly payment of 10s. 

2 76. p. 30. 



272 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

referred by the College for an account of it. The account 
has been supplied in all cases but two ; those, viz. of 
Corpus Christi and of Sidney Sussex College. . . It 
appears that the amount raised by tuition fees in 13 out 
of the 17 Colleges was 426,413 15s. Od., and that the Colleges 
contributed out of their income £1,131 6s. 3d., so that the 
Tutors and Lecturers are almost wholly paid by means of f 
fees charged directly on the students for these purposes." [ ' 

III. The Expenditure of the Universities and Colleges in i 

the Year 1871. 

"The Heads of the Colleges in the two Universities- 
receive annually £50,958 19s. 3d., whereof the Heads of! 
the 19 Colleges in Oxford receive 4*30,543 12s. 4d., and the 
Heads of the 17 Colleges at Cambridge 420,415 6s. lid. 

"The whole amount paid to Fellows of Colleges in 1871 
was 4204,147 15s. 7d., of which 4101,171 4s. 5d. was paid to I 
Fellows at Oxford, and 4102,976 lis. 2d to Fellows at I 
Cambridge. These amounts do not in all cases include 
the cost of allowance of various kinds made by the 
College." 

Scholars and Exhibitioners were paid out of the 
corporate income of the Colleges 450,534 5s. 0d., of which 
426,225 12s. Od. was paid at Oxford, and 424,308 13s. Od. at 
Cambridge. Large sums were also paid out of the Trust 
Funds. 

46,694 10s. lOd. was paid to University Professors 
at Oxford out of College incomes, and 41,011 lis. 8d. 
at Cambridge. Augmentation of benefices amounted 
at Oxford to 48,772 2s. 4d., and at Cambridge to 
45,253 2s. 3d. 

The cost of Management of estates was : Oxford, 
48,801 18s. 0*d.; Cambridge, 46,906 6s. 6d. ; equal to a 
percentage of 42 17s. 7d. in the first case, and 42 13s. 8d. 
in the second. 2 

A deposit is ordinarily made by each student on 
entrance into a College, which stands to his credit in 
the College books during the whole time of his under- 
graduate course, being available to liquidate College bills 
in case of default. This deposit is called Caution money. 

i lb. pp. 31, 32. 2 lb. p. 34. 



THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 273 

The usual amount at Oxford is £30. The College holds 
these moneys, which it puts to its own use and has 
the benefit of any profit derived therefrom. At Cam- 
bridge the College requires a deposit to be made by each 
student at the time of his admission, and allows the 
Tutor to retain this money and employ it to his own 
profit. The deposit is £15 for a pensioner and £10 for 
a sizar. " We think that it should be clearly understood 
that the Tutor receives the money solely as the agent 
of the College, and that the College is responsible for 
its repayment." ' 

" There is one point brought prominently out in 
the result of this inquiry : the great disparity between 
the property and income of the several Colleges and 
the number of its members. When that number is 
small, the expense of the staff and establishment is 
necessarily large in proportion." The Commissioners, 
however, did not think that it lay within their province 
to enter further into this subject. They confined them- 
selves strictly to finance. 

The new Statutes made both for the University and 
the Colleges by the Commissioners under the Act of 1877 
came into force in the year 1882. The following is a com- 
parison for Cambridge between the University and College 
receipts for 1883, the first year for which returns were 
made, and the present year 1913 : — 

University Chest. 

Nov. 3, 1881— 
Sept. 29, 1882. 1913. 

£ s. d. £ s. d. 

Rents and Dividends ... ... 3,294 1 9 1,873 11 1 

Capitation Tax and Compounders' 
Fund ... 



Degree Fees 

Matriculation Fees.. 
Examination Fees' 2 
University Press ... 
Miscellaneous 



9,591 5 9 15,909 17 11 

13,693 

19,688 19 6 6,273 18 

12,535 14 

2,500 

211 9 523 4 2 



Totals £32,785 7 9 £53,309 5 2 



i lb. p. 37. 

2 Arranged as Senior and Junior Proctors' Fees, £10,959 15s. Od. 
Registrary, £8,729 4s. 6d. 



274 



UNIVERSITY REFORM. 



Common University Fund. 1 



Assessment of Colleges 
Deductions 



1883. 
£ s. d. 
5,439 13 1 
829 5 7 



1913. 

£ s. d. 

30,322 11 7 

7,832 13 3 



£4,610 7 6 £22,489 18 4 



Stocks belonging to University. 



1883. 
£ s. d. 
306,648 15 10 



1913. 
£ s. d. 
646,165 12 8 



These items represent for the most part endowments 
ear-marked for particular purposes. Such endowments 
increase the teaching power of the University, but not its 
general resources, which it can apply as it thinks fit. 

The incomes of the Colleges assessable for University 
purposes were : — 





1883. 




1913. 




£ 


s. 


d. 


£ s. d. 


Peterhouse 


6,632 


14 


1 


6,758 14 1 


Clare ... 


11,174 


8 


4 


12,924 2 2 


Pembroke 


11,556 


16 


4 


13,542 13 5 


Caius ... 


14,568 


4 





24,930 14 10 


Trinity Hall ... 


7,724 


17 





8,138 2 5 


Corpus 


7,343 


11 


4 


10,810 11 4 


King's 


28,549 


19 


1 


25,640 9 


Queens' 


6,827 


10 


3 


7,843 5 11 


St. Catharine's 


4,904 


3 


7 


5,719 9 6 


Jesus... 


11,625 


17 


4 


12,968 19 7 


Christ's 


10,860 


17 


3 


12,133 17 10 


St. John's 


36,805 


5 


9 


33,344 2 6 


Magdalene 


4,705 


6 


7 


6,109 17 


Trinity 


46,367 


9 





55,393 


Emmanuel 


9,516 


5 


8 


17,735 3 1 


Sidney 


7,251 


13 





10,858 10 8 


Downing 


4,850 


9 


7 


7,132 9 7 




£231,265 


8 


2 


£271,983 14 8 



The gross corporate income shows a like growth, but 
it must be noted that the returns from the first have been 
for different years. In the first instance eight Colleges 
made returns for the year ended Michaelmas, 1882, and 



i In 1883 the rate at which the Colleges were assessed was 2i per 
cent. ; in 1913 it was 11J per cent. 



THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 



nine for the year ended Michaelmas, 1883. 
pancy has continued ever since. 



275 
This discre- 





1883. 




1913. 




£ s. 


d. 


£ s. d. 


Peterhouse 


7,146 18 


7 


8,212 3 11 


Clare ... 


14,623 19 


7 


16,558 13 5 


Pembroke 


11,714 15 


7 


13,896 3 9 


Caius ... 


21,928 1 


9 


29,639 14 9 


Trinity Hall ... 


9,300 14 


10 


8,828 6 


Corpus 


10,038 12 


1 


12,325 5 7 


King's 


38,112 15 


11 


37,654 14 3 


Queens' 


6,871 10 


7 


8,686 3 1 


St. Catharine's 


5,526 10 


4 


6,063 14 11 


Jesus... 


12,720 8 


8 


13,505 7 9 


Christ's 


14,445 15 


7 


14,943 7 11 


St. John's 


45,511 19 


10 


42,945 7 7 


Magdalene 


5,234 9 


4 


6,931 9 3 


Trinity 


78,903 





76,492 2 6 


Emmanuel 


13,564 6 





19,885 5 3 


Sidney 


7,434 18 


3 


14,952 11 10 


Downing 


6,986 16 


2 


9,988 12 7 




£310,065 13 


1 


£341,508 18 10 



Let us now compare the income of the Colleges in 
land, houses, and tithe in the returns for 1883 and 1913. 
The greatest fluctuations have taken place in these items. 

An exact comparison is here impossible because of 
the imperfections in the College returns. Caius has 
never yet made a proper return. It lumps together in 
one total, lands on beneficial leases, and at rack-rent, 
houses on beneficial or long leases, and at rack-rent, 
copyholds, leases and tithes, a union of eight items. 
Its figures therefore are given separately in the previous 
table. In 1872, at the time of the Royal Commission, 
it had 656 acres of land let on beneficial lease, and 
houses yielding an annual income of £451, also let on 
beneficial lease. Its gross amount of tithe and other 
rent-charges was at that date £1,627. 

King's also fails to make its return in the required 
form. It lumps together three headings into one — lands 
at rack-rent, houses on long leases, and houses at rack- 
rent. It also lumps all its Trust funds together. 

Jesus has headings of its own — land rental, Cam- 
bridge house rental, London house rental, and Cambridge 
quit-rents. An identical form of return is given in the 
Statutes of all the Colleges and it ought to be followed. 



276 



UNIVERSITY REFORM. 



a 
a 

cc 
OD 

a 



T3 co 

a • <-< 

d t. as 

TO (U rH 

r^ CO 
.gCGoO 
CO « 



Hco 



3 -^ • 

5 o co 
W ^2 



a 


CO CO 


n 


<D i-i 




cc as 




e8 i-H 


<w 









o 

w 


OD CO 


o X 



0) 



cc co 

O CJH 

to^2 
01 



3 a °° 

K O) X 



■^ -w !Zl 

» o) 
si 

cS o • 

J gx 

w 00 



o 


<5 as 




0> r-l 






r - . 




a 
ca 


a; £2 

Z GO 
H CO 


J 




.O 



cf of 



H«H10t»ifH 10 05 05 
Ht««U)t»T(l!00'MO 



rH O O "* CO 

OS C- CO CO 
5^ i-l CO CO O 



H^tCfitlSSlHOfliO 

toasMw^wosMt-oi 

HHH^OHilOrtW 



X OS CO X CO 

CO rH CO CO O 

Ctf ■"* Iffi OO! rH 

1-TcT 



t- t» » i» O t- l> 
OS CO X 00 lO CO rH 
Ol ■>* •* CO CO <N CO 



I t 



di oj t- a o 

OS O) ^* OS CO 
«rj O CO CQ CO i-H 

of co"i-T 



rH OS CO OS OS X OS 

M00»O>fl»tO 

-^ c- os -** o -* •* 

l-f "* rH N 



t- CO C- O 

>o co o os 

«rt -i h I t> ■* 

of of of 



lO lO O) H O t- ■* }) 1(5 OO 

Q0t»t»H»M(M«iO-f 

t»OHijl«tO(l30ffl 



CO 'X GO iffi 

CO CO X D- 

«rt o C- I CO CO 



OOflOMO^COO 
OiffiOS-^fOOSOOiffiCO 
HtOHffllOMfflOi 1 



CO 'fl 

Ctf CO CO 



CO CO CO CI rH 

^ CO ^ o 
rH Iffi 00 CO I 



O CI M< iffi 

d -<*< OS CO 

Ctf rH CO I HIO 



MO>Ot» 

x -* © x 

iffi C- CO CO 



etf «n 



I I 



«tf.H I 



°r I 



Iffi Iffi 

i-H CO 
i-H ffil 



Iffi t~- -H^ Iffi i-H t~ 

■«* OS ->* GO Tf OS 

Sf? tN © CO 00 -*t< CI 

of ^T ffif of of -*~ 



■^QOO-^^f'SflffiOSf^OO 

TflcOd-^COOOCOCOOlC- 

>ffic^oxooocicoOi-H 



■* CO ffil -^ >ffi 



CI <N CO CO 



•f © CO CO i-i 

-* OS C— t— i-H 

CfJ t> ■* 00 00 CI 
C5 Iffi CO Co" Tf~ 



HHMCfHllJOlOO 
OOlffiGOGOOOCOOO-H^OCO 
i"HI>-COGOClCOrHOi-HCO 



O IffiCOOIIffiCOi-HGOi* Iffi Iffi 



e« 



III I I II I I I I I I I 



V, 



5 M I I 



«5 £ 



o 






rfl 




a 




0) 


2 












>s 


m 


3 




fl 


■y 


a 


o 




a 


a 


! — i 




oj 








u 


CJJ 


H 


O 



0) 



c3 

a as 



« flr2 

la J3 ca 

2 co O r3 ■ 

s-gi-s ■oc a 



0) 

a 

la 



o> -a -in tj -h « .a 



>»-a 
o a 

a fe 



ChOPhHO W > 02r?OccSHrdccQ H 



THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 



277 



The general features of the situation are, however, 
clear. Beneficial leases of lands have disappeared, and 
beneficial leases of houses have diminished by nearly one 
half. There are still too many, especially at Corpus. In 
1883, lands at rack-rent were beginning to feel the effects of 
the depression in agriculture. They have now practically 
got back to where they were then. Houses on long leases, 
and houses at rack-rent both show considerable increases, 
which more than make up for the depreciation in agri- 
cultural land. Tithe shows marks of the fall in prices. 

The Oxford Colleges have had a like financial history. 
Their lands have suffered from the depression in agricul- 
ture, but there have been greatly increased receipts from 
house property j 1 these having risen from £36,735 in 1883 
to £127,559 in 1911, a growth of £90,824, the increase being 
especially from houses and sites of houses let on long 
leases. The gross external receipts of the University and 
Colleges were in 1883, £318,000 ; in 1911, £387,000. The net 
external receipts at the two dates were as follows : — 



Colleges. 


1883. 


1911. 




£ 


£ 


University 


5,177 


5,991 


Balliol 


4,881 


4,669 


Merton 


13,877 


15,706 


Exeter 


3,752 


3,439 


Oriel... 


5,658 


4,879 


Queen's 


10,222 


18,145 


New ... 


18,307 


17,866 


Lincoln 


4,396 


4,247 


All Souls 


20,446 


18,983 


Magdalen 


23,514 


37,274 


Brasenose 


5,827 


12,595 


Corpus 


11,943 


11,978 


Christ Church 


27,368 


28,213 


Trinity 


5,196 


4,352 


St. John's 


12,165 


14,854 


Jesus... 


8,452 


8,706 


Wadham 


4,200 


2,724 


Pembroke 


3,492 


2,405 


Worcester 


3,245 


1,430 


Total ... 


192,123 


218,456 


The University 


14,313 


8,345 


Total ... 


£206,436 


£226,801 



i See The Times, May 24, 1913, with report of Mr. L. L. Price's paper, 
read before the Surveyors' Institution, from which the figures are taken. 



278 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

The external expenditure in the same years was 



Colleges. 


1883. 


1911. 




£ 


£ 


University 


1,933 


2,764 


Balliol 


1,546 


1,574 


Merton 


5,280 


12,970 


Exeter 


1,326 


868 


Oriel... 


6,230 


5,525 


Queen's 


4,431 


11,065 


New... 


14 146 


13,816 


Lincoln 


1,357 


1,855 


All Souls 


7,424 


11,610 


Magdalen 


15,062 


29,271 


Brasenose 


4,423 


4,804 


Corpus 


7,109 


4,014 


Christ Church 


21,971 


31,415 


Trinity 


1,759 


2,303 


St. John's 


8,489 


11,583 


Jesus 


3,289 


4,182 


Wadharu 


1,162 


2,132 


Pembroke 


342 


778 


Worcester 


1,791 


3,018 


Total ... 


109,070 


155,547 


The University 


2,894 


4,816 


Total ... 


£111,964 


£160,363 



The College contributions to the Common University 
Fund were £16,742 in 1883, and £35,867 in 1911. 

Oxford and Cambridge have between them a corporate 
income of about three-quarters of a million. There are 
besides all the College and University buildings, labora- 
tories, museums, libraries, observatories, and business 
premises. The capitalised value of the whole amounts 
to many millions. 

The question for the public is whether these magnifi- 
cent and constantly expanding resources are being made 
the best use of. 

Now that the chief facts have been given, attention 
may be called to two recent comments on them, the 
one relating to Cambridge, and the other the financial 
chapter (Chapter VII.) in Lord Curzon's book. 

The comment on the finances of Cambridge will be 
found in the April number of the Quarterly Review for 



THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 279 

1906. 1 The article is entitled A Plea for Cambridge ; it is 
written in a spirit entirely friendly to the University, and 
with inside knowledge. The Reviewer calls attention to 
the fact that Cambridge has twice appealed for outside 
help, once in 1898 and again in 1904. Oxford, it may be 
noted by the way, was compelled to do the same thing 
two years later. The reason in the case of Cambridge 
was obvious and conclusive. " Science had emptied the 
University Chest, yet science was still ' hungry and 
aggressive.' As the result of her straitened finances, Cam- 
bridge could no longer satisfy the just demands either of 
Science or of Letters." The writer first deals with " the 
belief, apparently ineradicable, that the older Universities 
teach and care for nothing but the ancient languages, 
Theology and Mathematics"; and contends that "it can- 
not be too often repeated that since the promulgation of 
the new Statutes in 1856, the University has advanced 
without pause to claim as her own the whole field of 
modern knowledge ; and that it is the rapidity of her 
advance which has depleted her treasury." He then 
gives an account of the expansion of University studies 
since 1851. There could not well be a better summary, 
and it deserves. the attention of all who are interested 
in the development of Cambridge. 2 The way is then 
open for a survey of the financial resources of the 
University. 

" The corporate income of the seventeen Colleges is, 
roughly, £310,000 per annum. This, with a sum of about 
£52,000 (called the Tuition Fund), received annually from 
the Lecture and Laboratory Fees of the 3,200 students, 
and £30,000 received annually by the University for 
degrees and other fees, constitutes the whole available 
income for College as well as University purposes, 
if we except certain Trust funds for the endowment 
of some Professorships, and those funds of the 
nature of charities, of which the Colleges are merely 
administrators. 

" The corporate income of the Colleges consists of (1) 
endowments, usually in the form of estates, which bring 
in £'220,000 a year ; (2) fees, rent of rooms, profits on 

i p. 499. 2 See pp. 500-510. 



280 UNIVEESITY KEFOKM. 

kitchens, and so forth, which bring in .£90,000. But 
the Colleges are great land-owners, and have the out- 
goings of land-owners. Though the expenses of the 
estate management are only about 7 per cent, of the 
revenues arising from the estates, yet £130,000 a year 
are spent on management, repairs and improvements, 
rates and taxes, interest on loans, and the mainten- 
ance of the costly College buildings in Cambridge. . . 
When allowance has been made for the inevitable expen- 
diture under these heads, there is left only £180,000 for 
all other purposes." 

The significance and importance of these facts are so 
great that the quotation may be broken in upon to point 
out that precisely the same state of things exists at 
Oxford. Mr. L. L. Price, in the paper mentioned above, 
said that the significant fact that two-fifths of the external 
receipts of the Colleges were absorbed by the external 
expenses would not surprise anybody who was acquainted 
with the circumstances of landed property. Rates, taxes 
and insurance showed a steady and considerable advance. 
The figure for 1911 (£32,670) was about twice that for 1883. 
Repairs and improvements, also, were a very heavy, if a 
necessary burden, and, like rates and taxes, they seemed 
to be ever tending upwards, the increase being from 
£26,000 to £48,000. 

To return to the Quarterly Reviewer. " The Fellow- 
ships and the stipends of the Heads of Houses absorb 
£78,000; and the contributions of the Colleges towards 
Scholarships account for £32,000." 

The Headships and Fellowships, be it noted, are 
sinecures. Not that the holders of them are on that 
account to be numbered among the unemployed. On the 
contrary, the great majority of them are very busy per- 
sons, but qua Heads of Houses and Fellows, they have, 
practically, nothing to do. 

"After deduction of Fellowships and Scholarships, 
there is left of the corporate income a sum of £70,000. 
Of this sum, £32,000 (including about £10,000 capita- 
tion tax), or nearly one-half, is paid as a direct contribu- 
tion to the University. . . Of the £38,000 remaining, 
£4,000 goes to supplement the Tuition Fund of £52,000, 
received from the students as fees ; the sum of £56,000 so 



THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 281 

obtained is applied to the provision of College and Univer- 
sity Lecturers. A large proportion of these fees is paid 
to the scientific departments of the University; and of 
the fees so paid the greater part is assigned as a contribu- 
tion to the maintenance of the several departments, and 
not, directly at least, to the payment of Lecturers." 

It will be noticed that the undergraduates pay for 
their own tuition except so far as they receive Scholar- 
ships and Exhibitions, and this in spite of the Colleges 
being so richly endowed. According to the latest returns 1 
the following sums were paid from corporate income to 
Tuition Funds : — Clare, £15 ; Caius, £1,115 ; Corpus, £75 ; 
King's, £1,798 ; Queens', £51 ; St. Catharine's, £31 ; 
Jesus, £63; Christ's, £96; St. John's, £520; Trinity, £190; 
Emmanuel, £605; Downing, £120; a total of £4,679, an 
increase of £679 since 1906. 

" Deducting the sum of £4,000, contributed by the Col- 
leges to the Tuition Fund, we have left over of the 
corporate income a sum of £34,000, or about £2,000 per 
College, available for the payment of College officers and 
servants, interest on loans, the expenses of College 
libraries, printing, and other expenses. . . 

"We now turn to the question of the Fellowships. 
The sum of £78,000 was in 1904 divided among 17 
Heads of Houses and about 315 ordinary Fellows. Of this 
sum the Heads of Houses received among them, as far as 
can be ascertained, £15,000, very unequally divided. The 
average stipend of a Fellow is thus about £200 per annum. 
When the last Commission sat, the maximum stipend of 
a Fellow was fixed at £250, and it was thought that this 
sum would usually be reached. But, except in the cases 
of one or two Colleges, the maximum is now never 
reached, and in certain cases the value of a Fellowship has 
fallen to less than £100 per annum. Of the 315 Fellows, 
some 245 were, in 1904, Resident, and some 70 Non-Resi- 
dent. Of the Residents, about 225 were holding some 
University or College office, educational or administrative. 
. . . The analysis shows that the number of ' Prize 
Fellowships' is small; and it is believed that they are 
steadily vanishing. 

l Cambridge University Reporter, Feb. 19, 1913. 



282 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

" The University income, which has to bear almost the 
whole cost of modern developments, is made up of the 
following items : Matriculation, Degree, Examination, 
and other fees, ,£30,000; direct contributions from 
Colleges, £32,000 ; income from endowments, £2,000— 
£64,000 in all. 

" In 1904, the University, in the course of its ordinary 
work, expended £65,300, distributed roughly as follows : — 

£ 

Officers, Secretaries, and Servants 4,100 

Maintenance of Business Offices, Registry, Senate House, 

and Schools 1,300 

Rates and Taxes 3,400 

Obligatory Payments from Income 1,300 

Stipends of Professors ... ... ... ... ... ... 12,100 

Stipends of Readers, University Lecturers, Demonstrators, 

and other Teachers 9,100 

Maintenance and Subordinate Staff of Scientific Depart- 
ments (including the Botanic Garden and Observatory) 9,600 

University Library, Staff, and Upkeep 6,300 

Examiners' Fees, &c ... 5,900 

Debt on Buildings, Sinking Fund, and Interest on Building 

Loans ... ... ... .. ... ... ... ••■ 8,500 

Printing and Stationery 2,600 

Pension Funds (Professors, £200 ; Servants, £150) ... 350 

Miscellaneous Expenses 450 

£65,300 



" There are 44 Professors ; very few of them receive 
£800 or more a year (including Fellowships), while the 
lowest limit of a Professor's stipend, unless he holds a 
Fellowship, is about £90 a year. The average annual 
income of a Professor is not more than £550 ; and of the 
yearly revenue of £24,000 required to produce this average, 
£7,000 are paid in the shape of Fellowships by the 
Colleges, and about £4,600 from the income of special 
Trust Funds and other benefactions, one payment of 
£800 being for a term of years only. One or two 
Professors at most receive a proportion of the fees paid 
for lectures and laboratories in their respective 
departments. There are 12 University Readers (or 
Sub-Professors). The new Statutes contemplated for a 
Reader the salary of £400 a year; but owing to the 
inadequacy of the University income, none receives 
more than £300 ; and in several cases only £100 is paid. 
There are 53 University Lecturers, whose stipends range 
from £200 a year to £50; and it is melancholy to note 



THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 283 

how many of them receive the lower sum, without any 
assistance from endowments such as Fellowships and the 
like. There are 13 University Teachers, almost all of 
them appointed by the Board for Indian Civil Service 
studies, and occupied, in the main, in teaching Eastern 
dialects ; and there are 44 Demonstrators, Curators, and 
Superintendents of Museums, whose stipends range from 
£200 a year to nothing at all. 

" The incomes of some of these gentlemen are supple- 
mented by Fellowships ; of others by a share of Lecture 
fees ; a few, too, may hold two such offices as Curator and 
Lecturer simultaneously. But when the addition from 
all sources (about £8,000 from fees or special funds, and 
£13,000 from Fellowships) has been made to the annual 
sum (£9,100) which the University has to give, we arrive 
at a total of about £30,000, giving the surprisingly low 
average income of £250 a year for any University Teacher 
other than a Professor. . . There are no resources 
from which these incomes may be increased according to 
the service of the holder ; and there is practically no 
provision for pension, except in the case of those teachers 
(less than one-half of the whole number) who hold 
Fellowships, and may expect, after many years of service, 
to earn the right to retain them permanently. In these 
circumstances it is not surprising that the University 
finds a difficulty in retaining many of its abler teachers." ' 

Such poverty in the midst of apparent affluence is 
startling, but there it is. 

Let us turn now to Lord Curzon's Chapter VII., 
the consideration of which was deferred till this point. 

" The revenue and expenditure of Oxford (i.e. of the 
University and Colleges in combination) . . . are 
partially and not very clearly shown in the annually 
published abstract, drawn up according to a form 
prescribed by the Statute of 1882. The account is partial, 
because in the case of the University it only deals with 
those sums that pass through the University Chest, 
whereas there are many sources of income that are not so 
handled ; and in the case of the Colleges, because new 
sources of income have accrued which are not covered by 

i lb. pp. 510-515. 



284 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

the Statutes. It is the reverse of clear, because, though 
the figures are there, very little atterupt is made to 
collate them or to show what the Colleges alone, or the 
Colleges and University in combination, are spending 
upon this or that object or branch of study." 

Balance-sheet of the University. 

The income of Oxford University is derived from 
(1) Endowments and the University Press, (2) Fees and 
Dues, (3) Trust Funds for particular purposes or institu- 
tions, and (4) College contributions. 

In 1907 the gross income from these sources was 
£76,152 14s. 8d., and net revenue £67,885 10s. 0d., available 
for the payment of the Officers, Professors, Readers 
and Examiners, the maintenance of its Institutions, 
Delegacies, Offices, and Buildings, and allotments for 
special purposes. 

From special Trust Funds there were received in 1907 
the sum of £12,026. Over £3,000 of this was expended 
in University Scholarships. The University is merely 
charged with the distribution of these endowments, but 
they are a portion of the resources applied to educa- 
tional objects. 

Balance-sheet of the Colleges. 

For the same year the gross receipts of the Colleges 
were £514,927 4s. 9d. Deducting the internal receipts, 
£139,977 9s. 8d., we arrive at a total gross College Income 
of £374,949 15s. Id. The gross receipts from Estates 
were £317,525 18s. 4d. The cost of management, repairs, 
etc., was £134,241 6s. 7d., leaving a net revenue of 
£183,284 lis. 9d., and a net revenue from all sources of 
£240,708 8s. 6d. 

The principal items, as they appear in the pub- 
lished Abstract, may be thus summarised : — 

£ 

Heads of Houses ... ... ... ... about 21,500 

Fellows ... ... ... ... ... ,, 61,500 

Scholars and Exhibitioners ... ... ,, 52,900 

Contributions to University purposes ... ,, 23,000 

College Officers ... ... ... ... ,, 11,800 

Chapels and Choirs ... ... ... ,, 8,400 

Contributions to Common University Fund... ,, 6,800 "i 

i Principles and Methods, pp. 141-145. 



THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 285 

But neither do the College accounts show the full 
amounts annually available : i.e. Balliol does not publish 
the income derived from the recently created Balliol 
Trust, nor Brasenose that of the Hulme Trust, nor 
Hertford of the Baring Trust. 

Tlie Published Accounts. 

(i) " It is impossible to ascertain from them the total 
sums paid partly by the University, partly by the Colleges, 
and partly from Trust Funds, to Professors, Readers, 
Lecturers, and Demonstrators. In other words, we do 
not know the cost of the Teaching Staff of the University. 

(ii) " Neither do we know the cost or method of pay- 
ment of the Teaching Staff provided by the Colleges, in 
the persons of its own Fellows and Tutors. 

(iii) " There is no summary of the annual expenditure 
whether from University or College endowments, upon 
Scholarships, Exhibitions and Prizes." 

Lord Curzon also criticises the accounts of the Uni- 
versity Institutions, such as the Bodleian Library, and 
also that the University Accounts do not include the 
Common University Fund nor College contributions to 
extra-Collegiate objects. He concludes : " A system of 
accounts cannot be held to be perfect which is veiled 
in so much obscurity, and requires almost an esoteric 
knowledge to enable the reader to pick his way through 
the darkness." l 

The above remarks apply, though in a lesser degree, 
to Cambridge. Cambridge, for one thing, has published 
separate accounts of the Common University Fund from 
the beginning. 

College Contributions to the University. 

A charge has been made that, though the University 
is poor and the Colleges are rich, the latter do not contri- 
bute to the needs of the former so much as they ought. 

In the case of all the Colleges but three, the present 
scale of College contributions to the University is " an 
initial 2 per cent, on the total net revenue, with additional 
progressive and cumulative percentages on net revenue in 
excess of £5,000, £10,000, £15,000, and £20,000." 2 

i lb. pp. 145-148. 2 lb. p. 149. 



286 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Lord Curzon points out : (1) that of the graduated tax, 
" by far the greater part is paid by a very small number of 
Colleges " ; (2) that the Colleges as a whole are far better off 
than when the Statute of 1882 was passed ; (3) there is a 
lack of system and co-ordination in the manner in which 
the payments have been made. 

Three methods of reform have been suggested : 

(1) An increase in the percentages of the College 

contributions. 

(2) The determination of a fixed scale of expendi- 

ture for each College, the surplus being 
appropriated by the University. 

(3) An increase in the statutory contributions, 

with power to spend some portion of it on 
objects approved by the University so as to 
interest each College in particular studies 
or institutions. 

College Financial Administration. 

"Greater system might with advantage be introduced." 
Each College dispenses its own revenue in its own way. 
Five or six Colleges in each year exhibit a loss. The 
remaining Colleges show credit balances, but are living as 
a rule very close up to their income. Colleges vary in 
what they charge to Internal payments. Some spend 
more on buildings, others on purely educational objects. 
One College spends from income, another raises loans. 
Raising a loan benefits the University, spending from 
income is to its detriment. Hence " it might be desirable 
to enact by Statute that College expenditure on repairs 
and improvements, external and internal, should not 
exceed in any one year a fixed percentage of the net 
income." 1 In some Colleges, Internal Receipts are used 
to subsidise insufficient External Receipts ; in others, the 
kitchen or other internal charges are subsidised out of 
general income. 

Scales of expenditure vary greatly. Three cases are 



given 2 : — 
(a) College. 
Worcester 
Hertford 
Merton 


Resident Under graduates. 

90 

108 

118 




Cost of Servants. 
£399 
£674 
£1586 


] 


i 16. p. 155. 


2 16. 


P- 


156. 



THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 287 

(6) College. Resident Undergraduates. College Entertainments. 

Waclham ... 99 ... ... £43 

Queen's ... 119 ... ... £204 

Trinity ... 146 ... ... £93 

(c) College. Resident Undergraduates. Cost of Chapel. 

University ... 144 ... ... £158 

Exeter ... 162 ... ... £241 

St. John's ... 160 ... ... £522 

These " are the inevitable consequences of a system 
in which there is no controlling authority beyond the 
Governing Bodies of the Colleges themselves, and in 
which the University is powerless to intervene." 1 

Management of College Estates. 

It is the management of College property in houses 
and land which has been the target of the most sustained 
criticism. The reformers have made two proposals. The 
first is that the whole of University and College property 
should be sold and the Governing Bodies left with the 
administration solely of the resultant funds. Lord 
Curzon dismisses this solution as not practicable, even 
if desirable. But he adds that it is possible that by the 
sale or exchange of outlying or scattered estates the 
Colleges might save themselves some trouble and perhaps 
expense. 

A more plausible suggestion is that the property of 
the University and Colleges might be transferred to an 
official body appointed by the Government, like the 
Ecclesiastical Commissioners, who should administer 
it on their behalf. Lord Curzon dismisses this suggestion 
also. At the same time he admits the drawbacks of the 
present system, and sums the position up thus : — 

" Just as in the case of the College contributions to 
University purposes and of College finances in general, we 
found that some exterior and controlling authority was 
required, so does it appear to be a desideratum in the 
management of those estates from which so large a 
portion of the College income is derived." 2 

Lord Curzon then gives details of the existing 
financial machinery at Oxford, the University Chest, and 

i lb. p. 157. 2 lb. pp. 160, 161. 



288 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

the Common University Fund, and also of the working of 
the University Press. This leads up to a consideration 
of the 

Financial Policy of the University. 

" We have previously compared the Hebdomadal 
Council to the Cabinet of the University, i.e. a Committee 
appointed by the Congregation to represent the Executive, 
to shape policy, and to initiate legislation. If the analogy 
were perfect, we might expect that this body would have 
supreme control over the University finances, and would 
possess a Finance Minister of its own, who would provide 
and co-ordinate the means for carrying out its policy and 
conducting the general work of the University, and who 
would frame an annual Budget for that purpose. But 
the very opposite is the case. The University has no one 
Treasury (but a number of semi-independent Treasuries), 
no Chancellor of the Exchequer, and no Budget. Council 
cannot spend a farthing ; it cannot even order a farthing 
to be spent. All it can do is to submit proposals for 
expenditure to Convocation. If an application is made to 
it by a Department for new expenditure of a permanent 
kind, or if it has itself decided upon any policy that 
involves the expenditure of money, its usual course is to 
send to the Chest, and ask if the means are forthcoming. 
But the Chest is not itself primarily an instrument for 
carrying out the policy of the Government ; it does not 
busy itself with policy at all. . . The Chest therefore 
may, and often does, return a negative reply. In that 
case Council may still submit a decree to Convocation, or 
it may turn for assistance to the Common University 
Fund. But the Fund is itself a self-contained and inde- 
pendent body, and may also refuse. . . 

" The public spirit and common sense of all the parties 
concerned have alone enabled this system to work without 
any conspicuous breakdown. But it must be obvious 
that it is strangely lacking in co-ordination, and that the 
absence of a central financial authority, representing the 
Government of the University, and invested with a 
sufficient control over all its funds, is a source of 
weakness and delay. . . The need of such central 
control has been rendered still more urgent by the 
growth of numerous and powerful departments inside 



THE FINANCIAL KESOURCES. 289 

the University, constituted for teaching purposes, but 
invested with financial powers." 1 To meet these diffi- 
culties Lord Curzon describes his 

Suggested Board of Finance. 

Lord Curzon rejects the amalgamation of the Chest 
and the Common Fund on the grounds (1) that it would 
involve the creation of a body inconveniently large, and 
which would sacrifice efficiency to comprehensiveness ; 
and (2) that it would be difficult to adjust the relations of 
such a body to the Council, which might easily find itself 
overshadowed. At Cambridge, however, there has been 
this amalgamation from the first under the Financial 
Board. 

His own suggestion is that " there should be created 
a new Committee or Board of Finance of moderate 
dimensions, of independent character, and possessed of 
adequate powers. . . Some outside authority is required 
(a) to elucidate and correlate University and College 
accounts ; (6) to exercise advisory and supervisory powers 
in connexion with the financial administration of both, 
but of the Colleges in particular, more especially with 
relation to the assignment of College contributions to 
University purposes ; (c) to exercise similar functions 
with regard to the management both of University and 
College estates ; (d) above all, to vivify the financial policy 
of the University." 

A Statute creating a Board of Finance was passed by 
Convocation on March 5th, 1912, the vote being placets 133, 
non-placets 26. The text of it appears in the Oxford 2 
University Gazette of the following day and is given below. 
From it the reader can gather how far Lord Curzon has 
been successful in getting what he wanted. 

116. pp. 165-167. 

2 1. There shall be a Board of Finance, which shall consist of nine 
members of Convocation, of whom three shall be nominated by the 
Chancellor, three shall be elected by the Hebdomadal Council, and three 
shall be elected by Convocation. 

2. The members of the Board shall be appointed in Michaelmas 
Term, and shall enter on office on the first day of January next following 
the date of their appointment. They shall hold office for six years, one 
of the three persons in each class vacating office every second year. 

3. If a member of the Board shall die, or shall resign, another 
member of Convocation shall be appointed in his place in the same 
manner in which the said member was appointed. He shall enter on 



290 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

office at once, but shall hold office for the unexpired residue only of the 
period of office of the person whom he succeeds. 

4. No member of the Board nominated by the Chancellor shall serve 
for more than twelve years in all. 

5. No member of the Board elected by the Hebdomadal Council or by 
Convocation who has served for a full period of six years shall be qualified 
to enter upon another period of office until after the lapse of a year. 

6. The Vice-Chancellor and the Proctors, if they are not members of 
the Board, shall nevertheless have the right to attend and speak at all 
meetings of the Board or its Committees, and shall be summoned thereto, 
and shall receive copies of all papers submitted to the Board or its 
Committees. 

7. The Board shall appoint annually one of its members to be 
Chairman. 

8. The Secretary to the Curators of the University Chest shall be 
Secretary to the Board. 

9. The Board shall have power to obtain such professional and 
clerical assistance as it may from time to time require on such terms as 
shall seem proper to the Board ; and the expenses thus incurred shall be 
defrayed by the Curators of the University Chest. 

10. The Board shall meet not less than four times a year and all its 
meetings shall be held in Oxford. Five members shall form a quorum. 

11. The duties of the Board shall be — 

(a) In each academical year, to prepare, on the basis of information 
received from the Curators of the University Chest and from 
the Delegates of the University Press and from the Hebdomadal 
Council, an estimate of income and expenditure of the Univer- 
sity for the calendar year folloAving, and to forward the same 
to the Hebdomadal Council before the beginning of Michaelmas 
Term ; and at the same time, and at any other time when it 
may think fit, to make recommendations to the Council as to 
the best means of making further provision, if required, to meet 
the estimated expenditure of the University, and generally 
to advise the Hebdomadal Council as to financial administration 
of the University. 

(b) To review annually the published accounts of the University, 

and of all Institutions, Delegacies, Boards, and Committees of 
the University, to report to the Hebdomadal Council thereon, 
and to make recommendations with a view more particularly 
to the economical administration of the properties or moneys 
concerned and the suitable disposal of surplus income. 

(c) To prepare annually for submission to the Hebdomadal Council, 
and for publication by the same, (1) a statement of the whole 
receipts and expenditure of the University together with those 
of the Colleges collectively during the preceding year, showing 
the sources of such receipts and the manner in which the 
payments have been distributed among various heads of ex- 
penditure, and also (2) a statement of the total amount of the 
contributions and other payments made by the Colleges 
collectively during the year for University purposes and of the 
objects to which this amount has been applied ; (3) a state- 
ment of — 

A. The revenue of each College taxable for University 
purposes after deducting protected revenue, excepted by the 
Commissioners in University Statutes Tit. XIX. § 16. cl. 2. 

B. The amount which each College is liable to pay on this 
revenue under the graduated Income-tax established by the 



THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES. 291 

Commissioners in Statute Tit. XIX. § 16. el. 4, before deductions 
are made under Statute Tit. XIX. $ 16. cl. 7, or in case of the 
Colleges exempted from the graduated tax, the amount to 
which each would have been liable, if the graduated tax had 
applied to that College. 

C. The payments (whether made to the Common Fund or 
otherwise) by which each College discharges the said obligations. 

D. The amount paid by each College for any University 
purpose beyond the minimum prescribed for it by the graduated 
Income-tax 

(i) in fulfilment of other obligations imposed on it by the 

Commissioners ; 
(ii) by way of voluntary contribution. 

(d) To review annually the published accounts of the several 
Colleges and, after communication with any College concerned, 
to report to the Hebdomadal Council thereon, with special 
reference to economy of administration and to any matter in 
which the interests of the University are directly or indirectly 
involved. 

(e) To consider from time to time the statutory and other contri- 
butions made by the Colleges to University purposes, and, if it 
thinks fit, to advise the Hebdomadal Council as to any action 
on these matters by the Council that may appear desirable. 

(/) To consider from time to time the forms in which University 
and College accounts are prepared and published, and to advise 
the Hebdomadal Council thereon. 

(g) To confer, at the request of the Hebdomadal Council or of the 
Body concerned, with any University Body or with the 
Governing Body of any College, for the proper carrying out of 
the above objects, and to consider any representations that 
may be made to it by any of these Bodies. 

(h) To take into consideration any question of finance referred to it 
by the Hebdomadal Council, and to advise the Hebdomadal 
Council thereon. 

(i) To perform any other duties of advice and supervision connected 
with the financial administration of the University which may 
from time to time be assigned to it by any Statute of the 
University. 



CHAPTER XII. 

SUGGESTIONS FOR A SCHEME OF REFORM 
FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE. 

The phrase, " University Reform," is made up of two 
apparently simple words, but it will be well at the outset 
to come to a clear understanding as to what precisely 
is meant by them. The functions of a University are 
generally held to be three : (1) to impart instruction, 
(2) to give facilities for acquiring knowledge, (3) to add 
to the sum of existing knowledge ; in other words, a 
University has been looked upon as a place for (1) Teaching, 
(2) Learning, and (3) Research. Most persons will agree 
that it ought to be a place for all three. In that case 
it is important to determine the order of these functions : 
which shall come first and be pre-eminent, and which 
shall be subordinate. Mark Pattison held that Oxford 
and Cambridge should be first and foremost seats of 
learning, the homes of learned men, who by their mere 
existence would raise the whole tone of the national life ; 
Research to him came next ; Teaching was to be practised 
rather because it benefited the teacher than because it 
benefited the taught. Newman, as we have seen, thought 
that Research was altogether out of place at a University. 1 

Practical people, however, will be content to take 
things as they find them. The Universities of Oxford and 
Cambridge, as they now exist, are teaching institutions. 
They foster Learning, and they do something for Research ; 
but these things are subordinate to their main work of 
imparting instruction, examining men in it, and giving 
degrees according to the results. University Reform, then, 
is here taken to mean primarily making the Universities 
as efficient teaching institutions as possible. 



i See the characteristic passage in his Idea of a Ihiiversity, pp. 
xiii-xiv. 






SUGGESTIONS. 293 

This being granted, University Reform may be 
divided into three branches. It means increasing 
to a maximum the efficiency of the Universities by 

(1) bringing them into right relations with the Colleges, 
and the Colleges into right relations with one another ; 

(2) giving the Universities a proper Constitution, 
or system of self-government ; and (3) bringing the 
Universities as thus reformed into right relations with 
the rest of our system of national education. This 
country possesses Elementary Schools, Middle Schools, 
Grammar Schools, Local Universities, National Univer- 
sities. Its system of education, so far as it possesses one, 
is built up of these different parts. These all should be 
brought into right relations with one another, and com- 
munication between them should be as easy as possible. 
Then England will possess a properly organised system of 
education. The problem therefore is one of internal 
organisation and external adjustment. 

In this adjustment the interests of the nation must 
be paramount. The internal organisation must come 
before the external adjustment. Oxford and Cambridge 
cannot, in their present shape, be fitted into a national 
system. The reason is that they are not Universities like 
a Scottish, a German, or an American University, but 
Universities of Colleges, or Corporations of Corporations ; 
that is to say, collections of practically independent 
bodies. True, there is more co-operation and correlation 
than there was between University and College, and 
College and College, but there is no organic unity, and the 
time has come when the University must achieve that 
unity by the co-ordination of the Colleges. The external 
adjustment can then be effected. Such adjustment is 
obviously impossible while there are 21 separate Colleges 
at Oxford and 17 at Cambridge. These 38 institutions 
cannot each by itself be fitted into a national system. 

Section I. Relations of the Univeksity and the Colleges. 

University Reform, in the first place, is a problem in 
Federalism, and the difficulty to be faced is that which 
always crops up in this case, — how to reconcile the claims 
of the central authority with those of the constituent 
parts. There may be some who will altogether deny this 



294 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

view of the matter. Had Mark Pattison been alive it is 
probable he would have done so. He says l : " We have 
learnt that there is no conflict of objects or interests 
between the Colleges and the University — that they are, 
in fact, the same men under a different denomination. . . 
We hear no more of the old complaint of the usurpation 
of University functions by the Colleges." 2 

Two criticisms may be made upon this statement. It 
is not as accurate as it once was to say that the University 
and the Colleges are the same men under a different 
denomination. Cambridge has of late years been con- 
stantly reinforcing the ranks of the teachers at Oxford, 
and Oxford has in one or two cases returned the compli- 
ment. Besides this, Cambridge has drawn teachers 
from other Universities, or gone for them outside the 
Universities altogether. Such persons may be made 
members of a College, but their feelings for the University 
will tend to prevail over their feelings for the College in 
which they are incorporated. 

Again, even if the two classes were identical, they 
might still hold different views as to the relations 
which the Colleges ought to bear to the University. 
The inhabitants of the several States make up col- 
lectively, and are identical with, the inhabitants of 
the United States of America; but from the first there 
have been two parties among them ; the Republicans, 
emphasising the need of a strong central government ; and 
the Democrats, anxious before all things to safeguard the 
ria'hts of the individual States. When Mark Pattison 
wrote the above words in 1868 the first Elementary Edu- 
cation Act had not been passed, and two years had to 
elapse before it became law. Of organisation in Secondary 
Education there was none. Since then so much progress 
has been made that the Government is at this moment 
said to be contemplating a great unifying measure which 
is to give us a national system of education. The Univer- 
sities of Oxford and Cambridge cannot be left outside such 
a scheme, and thus the whole question of their organisa- 
tion bids fair speedily to become a living issue. In the 

1 Suggestions, pp. 46, 47. 
2 The passage is given more fully above at pp. 98, 99. 



SUGGESTIONS. 295 

discussion which the raising of that issue will bring, the 
relations of the Colleges to the University must hold a 
prominent place. Before long we may have our Republican 
and Democratic parties at Oxford and Cambridge, each 
with a definite principle to advocate, and definite 
interests to protect. 

In endeavouring thus to mark out the battle-field I 
am only too well aware that it means choosing the line 
of the greatest resistance. The Colleges are naturally 
jealous of their independence and of their separate 
interests, and they may be expected to fight vigorously 
against any interference with their present status. Lord 
Curzon has been quoted in Chapter X. as holding that the 
reconcilement of the Colleges with the University is the 
most difficult of all University problems. He makes 
it quite plain where the difficulty lies. " It needs but a 
small acquaintance with Oxford men to recognise that 
while the University has many claims upon their affection, 
the College, as a rule, has much greater. In the College 
feeling we have the most powerful sentiment to which we 
can appeal; . . and any attempt to injure or subvert 
the Colleges, even in the interests of the University, 
would excite widespread resentment." No sane person 
Avould wish to injure the Colleges, much less to subvert 
them ; but he can provoke quite enough opposition to 
satisfy him far short of that. The Cambridge Committee, 
alluded to in the same chapter, agreed on many things, 
yet when they came to consider the provision of further 
University teaching, were " of opinion that they were not 
in a position to consider the requirements of the different 
studies " ; and as to methods of paying for such teaching, 
they "make no positive suggestion, and leave to the several 
special Boards the duty of bringing forward proposals as 
they may become necessary." 1 In other words, they 
abandon the problem to others, regarding it as insoluble 
so far as they themselves were concerned. 

But difficult as the question is, it will have to be 
faced. Encouragement is to be derived from the progress 
of events. It is true that Parliament in the Acts of 1854 
and 1856 did not dare to put in force the recommen- 

i Report, p. 13. 



296 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

dations of the Commissioners with regard to University 
teaching, but what the timidity of our legislators failed 
to effect is coming about by the natural development 
of the newer studies. Sir William Hamilton long ago 
foresaw that the Natural Sciences would have to be 
taught by the University. They are very expensive 
subjects, and the necessary laboratories, museums, and 
workshops, with all their costly specimens, materials and 
apparatus, are beyond the means of any individual College 
to provide upon anything like a sufficient scale. Three 
Colleges at Cambridge, St. John's, Caius, and Sidney, 
started laboratories of their own. They have all three 
closed them as such, and the work is concentrated in the 
University buildings. 

Then again, the Act of 1877 established the right 
of the Universities to levy a tax on College property, a 
constitutional advance of the greatest significance. For 
this, Science again is mainly responsible. The Univer- 
sity in its poverty was unable to meet the demands of a 
subject always aggressive and hungry for more. There 
was nothing for it but to take toll of Collegiate riches. 
The outstanding fact then of academical history during 
the last sixty years is the growing power of the University. 
It had always retained the right of examining and giving 
degrees, of public discipline, and a portion of the teaching. 
It has gained a larger proportion of the teaching and the 
right of taxation. The principles embodied in these 
achievements have but to be carried to their logical 
conclusion, and a unified University must be the result. 
Will the Colleges have wisdom to discern the signs of the 
times ? 

Parenthetically, it may be remarked, that opinion at 
Oxford seems to be more advanced than at Cambridge. 
Lord Curzon writes 1 : " We find the reformers of 1850 
engaged in the attempt to reanimate and re-enthrone the 
University as against the alleged encroachments of the 
Collegiate system, and we recognise the same note in 
the utterances of the present day." And again : 2 " Never- 
theless the complaint that the Colleges still dominate the 
University has been actively revived and is in the forefront 

i Principles, p. 16. ^ lb. p. 121. 



SUGGESTIONS. 



297 



of every call for University Reform." Reformers at Cam- 
bridge have not been so definite in their statements. 

It thus becomes necessary to examine the Collegiate 
system and its working somewhat in detail, that both its 
merits and defects may be made plain. A College is 
a many-sided institution, being at once a University in 
little, a Boarding-School and an Athletic and Social Club, 
and it cannot be fully understood unless all these aspects 
of it are kept in view. 

It is as teaching institutions that the Colleges try to 
be Universities on their own account. Each admits mem- 
bers on its own terms, compels them to attend its own 
courses of instruction, and rewards them with distinctions 
and offices. 

The following is a list of the Cambridge Colleges, with 
the number of undergraduates on their books, and some 
particulars as to their finances for the academic year 
1912-3 :— 





1^0, of Under- 


Gross Corporate 


Assessment for 




graduates. 1 


income (apart 


University 




from Trust Funds). 


purposes. 2 






£ 8. d. 


£ s. d. 


Trinity 


672 


76,492 2 6 


55,393 


Caius 






327 


29,639 14 9 


24,930 14 10 


Pembroke . . 






293 


13,896 3 9 


13,542 13 5 


St. John's .. 






244 


42,945 7 7 


33,344 2 6 


Christ's 






227 


14,943 7 11 


12,133 17 10 


Jesus 






212 


13,505 7 9 


12,968 19 7 


Clare 






201 


16,558 13 5 


12,924 2 2 


Emmanuel .. 






192 


19,885 5 3 


17,735 3 1 


Queens' 






181 


8,686 3 1 


7,843 5 11 


King's 






166 


37,654 14 3 


25,640 9 


Trinity Hall 




146 


8,828 6 


8,138 2 5 


St. Catharine's 




129 


6,063 14 11 


5,719 9 6 


Downing 




116 


9,988 12 7 


7,132 9 7 


Magdalene .. 






115 


6,931 9 3 


6,109 17 


Sidney 






112 


14,952 11 10 


10,858 10 8 


Corpus 






85 


12,325 5 7 


10,810 11 4 


Peterhouse .. 






81 


8,212 3 11 


6,758 14 1 


Totals .. 






341,508 18 10 


271,983 14 8 



1 See the University Calendar for 1912-13. Objection may be 
raised to these figures on the ground that the Colleges do not all make 
their returns on the same basis, i.e. some of them count in as on their 
books those who are coming into residence in the following October, 
and some do not ; but the totals, however made up, are sufficiently 
accurate for the purposes of the present argument. 

2 University Reporter, November 5th, 1912, p. 190. 



298 



UNIVERSITY REFORM. 



It will be seen that in point of numbers Trinity is 
more than twice as large as the next largest College, and 
more than eight times larger than the smallest College. 

There is a like disparity in the resources at the 
disposal of the Colleges. Trinity has a gross corporate 
income nearly thirteen times as large as that of St. 
Catharine's. If we perform the operation on which Mark 
Pattison poured such scorn, but for which we can plead 
the high authority of the late Marquis of Salisbury, — 
divide the pence by the pupils — the following are the 
results in round figures :— 

Yearly Income 
per Undergraduate. 
£ 

King's ... ... ... ... ... 227 

St. John's ... ... ... ... ... 176 

Corpus ... ... ... ... ... 133 

Sidney ... ... ... ... ... 133 

Trinity ... ... ... ... ... 114 

Peterhouse ... ... ... ... 101 

Emmanuel ... ... ... ... 100 

Caius ... ... ... ... ... 90 

Downing ... ... ... ... ... 86 

Clare ... ... ... ... ... 82 

Trinity Hall ... ... ... ... 68 

Christ's ... ... ... ... ... 66 

Jesus ... ... ... ... ... 64. 

Magdalene... ... ... ... ... 60 

Pembroke ... ... ... ... ... 50 

Queens' ... ... ... ... ... 48 

St. Catharine's ... ... ... ... 47 



Taking the last three Colleges as approximately equal, 
King's has roughly four and three-quarters times as 
much corporate income per undergraduate as Pembroke, 
Queens' and St. Catharine's ; St. John's has three and 
a half ; Corpus and Sidney two and three-quarters ; 
Trinity two and a half ; and Peterhouse and Emmanuel 
double. Looking at the same facts from another point 
of view, if King's could make its endowments go as far as 
St. Catharine's does, it could educate about 800 under- 
graduates instead of 166. The significant point is that 
rich Colleges are, as a rule, expensive ; and poor Colleges, 
cheap. A large endowment does not necessarily mean 
education at a low rate. 



SUGGESTIONS. 299 

Now let us turn to the Boarding- School aspect of the 
Colleges. The Colleges are rival institutions, and like to 
have their houses full. With all their endowments they 
would have difficulty in paying their way if they were not 
full. Accordingly they compete with one another in the 
open market, and each endeavours to attract to itself the 
most promising members of the successive generations of 
would-be students. The method in which they compete 
deserves attention. Every year, in the first week in 
December, two wealthy and powerful groups enter the 
field. Trinity, Clare, and Trinity Hall make up the one ; 
St. John's, Caius, King's, Pembroke, Emmanuel, Christ's, 
and Jesus compose the other. 1 The first group has 
behind it a corporate income of £ 100,000 a year, the 
second of £185,000, a grand total of £235,000 out of 
the £341,508. These combinations between them reap 
practically the whole of the harvest. The other Colleges 
come straggling in one by one, and glean the scanty ears 
which their richer rivals have left untouched. 2 

The results are striking and peculiar. Mr. J. A. 
Venn, who has given great attention to University 
statistics, published some tables in the Cambridge Review 
for January 23rd and 30th, 1908, from which the following 
figures are taken. 

The period 1851-1906 is selected because 1851 was the 
first year in which there was a free choice of more than 
one Honour course. The number of Honour degrees 
taken at each College during this period is represented as 
a percentage of the total Matriculations from 1848 to 1903, 
because as the University course is normally for three 
years, the undergraduate who matriculated in 1848 may 
for purposes of calculation be held to have taken his 
degree in 1851. 

i King's has recently dropped out, and now holds its Entrance 
Scholarship Examination independently. 

2 If this paragraph is thought too severe the plea may be put in 
that Mark Pattison says the same thing (Suggestions, p. 66), when he 
points out the effect of the division of the University into indepen- 
dent, and, for this purpose, rival houses. "Every College is desirous 
to have its rooms full, and every College is desirous of showing as 
many University honours as it can. Consequently the Colleges outbid 
each other in the general market for talent. If one College raises its 
Scholarships to £100 a year, the others must go as far in the same 
direction as their means will allow." 



300 



UNIVERSITY REFORM. 
Honours. Table A (1851—1906). 



College. 


Total 


Percentage 

to 

Matriculations. 




Honours. 


King's 1 


965 


91'8 


Sidney 


547 


64-3 


St. Catharine's 


412 


54-9 


Christ's 


1,078 


54-6 


Downing 


223 


52-9 


St. John's 


2,643 


52-0 


Pembroke 


942 


50*2 


Emmanuel 


956 


50-1 


Queens' 


490 


48*4 


Caius 


1,242 


48-3 


Peterhouse 


424 


47'8 


Trinity 


4,265 


46-2 


Clare 


760 


39*8 


Corpus 


583 


34-7 


Magdalene 


282 


31-9 


Jesus 


624 


30-6 


Trinity Hall ... 


648 


27-0 


Fitzwilliam Hall 2 


154 


72 



Mr. Venn gives a second table showing the figures for 
the five years, 1902-6 inclusive, calculated on the same basis. 
Honours. Table B (1902—6). 



College. 


Honour Degrees. 


Percentage 
to Matriculations. 


King's 


187 


76-9 


Downing 


33 


66-0 


Sidney 


82 


65-6 


Peterhouse 


43 


63-2 


St. Catharine's 


49 


62-0 


Caius 


184 


55-4 


Magdalene 


31 


55-3 


St. John's 


206 


54-9 


Christ's 


135 


54-8 


Emmanuel 


165 


54-2 


Pembroke 


188 


51*3 


Jesus 


83 


497 


Queens' 


72 


49-6 


Corpus 


41 


43-1 


Trinity 


345 


36*7 


Clare 


107 


36-5 


Trinity Hall ... 


59 


24*3 


Fitzwilliam Hall 


32 


13-4 



1 It must be borne in mind that King's besides giving an education of 
such superior quality, has to maintain its very expensive chapel and choir. 

2 Fitzwilliam Hall in all three tables represents the Non-Collegiate or 
Unattached Students. 



SUGGESTIONS. 



301 



Let us next look at the Poll Degrees as given by Mr. 
Venn : — l 

Table C Poll Degrees, 1902—6. 



College. 


Poll Degrees. 


Percentage to 
Matriculations. 


St. Catharine's 


40 


50-6 


Downing 


23 


46-0 


Peterhouse 


30 


44-1 


Corpus 


39 


4P0 


Queens' 


59 


40-5 


Trinity 


363 


38-6 


Emmanuel 


108 


35*1 


Clare 


102 


348 


Christ's 


85 


34*5 


Caius 


105 


3P6 


Pembroke 


116 


31-6 


Jesus 


53 


3P3 


St. John's 


115 


306 


Sidney 


36 


28-8 


Trinity Hall ... 


68 


28-1 


Fitzwilliam Hall 


57 


240 


Magdalene 


10 


17-6 


King's 


30 


123 



Mr. Venn inserts in his tables Cavendish Hostel, which 
is now extinct, and Selwyn which is not on the same 
footing as the other Colleges. His University totals are 
thus : Honours 44/4 for the fifty years, and Poll Degrees 
32"9 or 77*3 combined. 

It will be seen that during the longer period less than 
half the students obtained a degree in Honours. The 
shorter and more recent period only shows an increase of 
1-9 in this percentage. It is still under the half. The 
rest, if they take a degree at all, have to be content with 
a Poll degree, i.e. a degree taken on work which for the 
most part ought to be, and could be, better done at 
school. " Since about 1820," writes Mr. Venn, 2 " the 
proportion of students taking a degree has remained 
constant in the neighbourhood of 77 per cent." In other 
words, 23 per cent, of the Cambridge undergraduates 
disappear without taking a degree at all. There must 
always be a leakage, owing to ill-health, parental mis- 
fortunes, and other unavoidable causes, but when 



i Cambridge Revieiv, Vol. XXIX., p. 196. 
2 Oxford and Cambridge Matriculations, p. 13. 



302 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

allowance has been made for everything of this kind, 23 
per cent, remains a very high proportion of failures. The 
Colleges, as has been pointed out, have got into their 
hands practically the entire regulation of the terms of 
admission to the University, the number of Non-Collegiate 
students being too small to affect the general result. 
Some of the fruits of this system are made manifest by 
the figures just given. 

A fourth table, which I compiled in 1907, shows the 
number of First Classes taken by members of the various 
Colleges during the ten years, 1898-1907. 

To take the last table first. The power of wealth 
is here apparent. The richer Colleges can buy the first 
class men, the poorer Colleges only get them by a lucky 
chance. What can Magdalene, Corpus and St. Catharine's 
do against Trinity, St. John's, King's and Caius ? King's, 
Trinity and St. John's do well, but their work is very 
expensive. 

The other tables show some extraordinary divergen- 
cies. Taking Table B, Trinity may be able to buy First 
Classes, but its percentage of Honours to Matriculations, 
36*7, is very low, and shows that it wastes its magnificent 
resources by admitting too many Poll men, its percentage 
of Poll men, 38'6, being higher than the percentage 
of Honour men. Poll and Honour men between them 
account for 75*1 of the entries, showing that just a 
quarter of the Trinity undergraduates go down without 
taking a degree. There is a great discrepancy between 
91*8 and 27, the highest and the lowest figures in Table A, 
and between 76*9 and 24'3, the corresponding figures in 
Table B, a proof of very different work being done by the 
Colleges. Some are doing extremely well, others are doing 
decidedly badly. The reader can sort out the separate 
examples for himself. 

A College which has not wealth can compete for 
entries with inducements of a different kind,— a reputation 
for success in athletics, or for an easy discipline, or both. 
Thus Mr. Charles Tennyson says 1 : " College A has risen 
in the last ten years, since its acquisition of a prominent 
football player as Tutor, from 150 to nearly 250 under- 

l Cambridge from Within, p. 68. 



SUGGESTIONS. 



303 



eg 
CO 


-II 1 1 1 1 ! 1 [ 1 


- 


oo 

c 

o 
D 


94 1-1 °° I 1 [ 


IO 


2 


-* N I N | I 1 | 


X 


p 

o 
Q 


1 1 I. S 1 H 1 1 1 II 


CD 




t^ _| -* t~ I -H 


i-H 




IO iH | *-' CO CM 


1— 1 


a 
o 

a 


— 1 O I CO 1 I 1 CM 1 — 1 1 


CM 
CM 


u 
a! 

5 


X ■* | IO I 1 1 1 -H i-H I 
rH 1 CM 1 1 1 1 1 


OS 


c 
-a 


OS f-f 1 Mill I I IN 1 
. — 1 1 00 ) 1 1 1 1 1 


lO 


3 


cs n 1 cs cc "# 1 i-i rti 

i— 1 CM 1 1 1 


co 


J3 


1-11O1— 1 "* l-l I :] —1 i-H CO 1 
-H N N 1 1 1 


CD 


E 


CM O I 10 10 iH CO | i-H CO | 

-h cm 1 co 1 1 


O 

X 


o 


OS -H 1 CS CO N rH I CM Ol 
^H ■* 1 1 1 


CD 
X 


3 

D 


csio^H n n ^ h 1-1 co -* 1 

rt CM CO 1 


CO 

cs 


g 


1-1 t^ i-H CO I i-H IO I <N t>- I 

i-H "tf CO 1 "H 1 1 


!-H 




co co co co -* co co cm <n cm i 

-* CM CD 1 


O 

CD 

l-H 


H 

fa 

H 


CO IO IO 00 iH O CM I IO IO rH 
t~ CD CD i-H | rH 


IO 

IO 
CM 


O 
ft 

EH 


"3 g8: 

• 2 ^ 

'-3 : § fl c3 

H _ .2 a) 
§ .2 22 !jcc 

S O § a Eh h 


CO a X CO 

q Jh q : 

to CS to rt O 
_ si C ci cS a co 

"3 s 3 .« 2 .2 
-S .2 J 'g^ § § 

•fH i^ W W y 

W O S § H 


co 



304 



UNIVERSITY REFORM. 



graduates. He adds 1 : " When everything is said, the 
mechanism of work at the University is as nothing 
compared with the vast machinery of play." Mr. Arthur 
Gray, in his book, Jesus College, has the following 
passage' 2 : " In 1875 the College boat attained the proud 
position of Head of the River. It kept it for the un- 
exampled space of eleven years. . . The inflow of 
freshmen became phenomenal ; in 1878 they numbered 
eighty-seven, in the next year seventy-four. These 
numbers were never again equalled. . . After 1890, 
Jesus lost its athletic predominance, and since then 
has suffered a decline in numbers." This is where the 
Athletic Club side of a College comes in. 

The Colleges show great differences not only in size 
and income, but also in tone and temper. A striking 
illustration of this fact is the recent vote of the Senate on 
the question of throwing open the Divinity Degrees to 
persons other than members of the Church of England. 
It was taken on November 22nd, 1912, when the votes 
were: In favour of removing the restriction, 434; against 
removing it, 323; majority in favour, 111. 

The following are the figures for the separate 
Colleges : — 

Class I. Colleges in favour of removal. 





For. 


Against. 


Christ's 


28 


5 


King's 


44 


9 


Downing 


11 


3 


Selwyn 


7 


2 


Magdalene ... 


5 


2 


Caius 


38 


16 


Trinity Hall 


14 


7 


Jesus 


13 


8 


Peterhouse 


14 


10 


St. John's ... 


66 


40 


Trinity 


113 


72 


Emmanuel ... 


25 


18 


Class II. 


Colleges against removal. 






Against. 


For. 


St. Catharine's 


22 


3 


Corpus 


35 


6 


Queens' 


14 


8 


Pembroke . . . 


24 


13 


Clare 


17 


14 


i 76. p. 166. 


2 pp. 229, 234. 





SUGGESTIONS. 305 

Class III. College equally divided. 

For. Against. 

Sidney Sussex ... 7 7 

The voting at St. Catharine's was 7 to 1 in favour of 
tests ; at Corpus, 6 to 1 ; at Christ's it was 5| to 1 against 
tests ; and at King's 5 to 1. Those who love darkness 
rather than light, those who love light rather than dark- 
ness, and those who like the two blended in an indis- 
tinguishable twilight can thus be all equally well suited. 

Another remarkable feature in the history of the 
Colleges is the extraordinary fluctuations in their numbers 
both when these are taken at longer and shorter intervals 
of time. In Cooper's Annals of Cambridge 1 there is given 
a list of the Headships, Fellowships, Scholarships, and 
Exhibitions in the several Colleges, and the number of 
Students on the Buttery tables on Commencement Day, 
1727. The total number of Students was 1,499. St. John's 
was conspicuously at the top with 351, — nearly a third of 
the whole University, while it had 60 Fellowships, 100 
Scholarships, and 100 Exhibitions. It has spent not far 
short of two hundred years in falling from the first place 
to the fourth with 244 undergraduates. Trinity during 
the same period has gone up from 227 undergraduates to 
672. Thus while the one College has decreased by a third, 
the other has multiplied itself three times over. There 
have been other fluctuations by the way. Forty years ago 
the numbers at St. John's were still 421, in 1905 they were 
221, in 1907 they were 315. In 1898 Trinity reached 709, 
by 1904 it had dropped to 629, while it surpassed the 700 
limit again in 1907 (701) and has now gone down to 672. 
Many further examples of these fluctuations may be 
found in Mr. J. A. Venn's Statistical Chart and the 
descriptive Text issued therewith. " In 1865, Corpus 
took the place of Caius, and was, for some three or four 
years, actually third in order of magnitude." It is now 
bottom but one with 85 undergraduates. " Jesus College 
was the next to take this precedence, rising rapidly from 
a very low position. . . Speaking of Pembroke, it is 
interesting to find that the familiar legend as to the 
entry there in 1862 being confined to a single freshman 

i Vol. v., p. 504. 



306 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

is true in fact. Moreover it is also true that he migrated 
to Caius, owing no doubt to loneliness. . . Trinity Hall 
for centuries humbly reposed at, or close to, the bottom in 
point of size. Then almost at a bound it rose to the head 
of the second rank." 1 And so instances might be multi- 
plied. The College endowments do not fluctuate in the 
same manner. They remain pretty constant in com- 
parison with the endowments of their neighbours. The 
mischief of the fluctuations then is this amongst others : 
at one time when the numbers are low, the financial 
resources are wasted, the machinery is being driven with 
too light a load ; at another time when the numbers go up 
with a bound, the machinery may be overloaded and the 
resources of the College unduly strained. A slow and 
steady expansion is as desirable in a College as it is in 
a commercial enterprise. When the numbers fall below 
the proper level, the College is not doing its duty as 
an educational body, and national education suffers 
accordingly. The 1872 Commissioners were alive to these 
facts, as shown by their words which have been previously 
quoted : — 

" There is one point brought prominently out in the 
result of this inquiry, the great disparity between the 
property and income of the several Colleges and the 
numbers of the members. When that number is small, 
the expense of the staff and establishment is necessarily 
large in proportion." 2 

This point of the number of students deserves further 
consideration. Let us suppose a College has forty-eight 
undergraduates in residence. This is no unfair figure. 
In 1905 Magdalene had forty-two undergraduates on its 
books, and these were not necessarily all in residence. Of 
our forty-eight some will be " Honours men " reading 
for a Tripos, others will be " Poll men " reading for a 
Pass degree. We will assume that there are twenty-four 
of each sort. As the University course is normally for 
three years, let there be eight men in each year reading 
for Honours. As there are eleven Triposes it will not be 
possible to find a man per year for each of them. Let us 
therefore cut down the number of Triposes for which 

i Descriptive Text, pp. 10-11. 2 Report, p. 37. 



SUGGESTIONS. 307 

there are men reading to four, the Natural Sciences, 
Mathematical, Classical and Historical, and let us suppose 
them to be equally attractive. Each will require several 
teachers if the instruction in it is to be adequate. How 
can so large a staff be economically provided for such an 
infinitesimal number of men as two per Tripos? As 
there are many varieties of the Pass degree, the same line 
of argument will apply to the Poll men. 

We may also make a further examination of Magda- 
lene as it was in 1905. To teach its forty-two under- 
graduates, to watch over their welfare, and to rouse in 
them a spirit of emulation, it had a Master, a President, a 
Tutor, an Assistant Tutor, three Lecturers, a Bursar, a 
Steward, a Dean, a Chaplain, a Praelector, a Librarian, 
and five Fellows. As a matter of fact there were seven 
people to fill the seventeen posts, or one official for every six 
undergraduates. 

Taking the offices in gross in 1907, the Colleges (in- 
cluding Selwyn and the Non-Collegiates) were managed 
by 28 Masters, Vice-Masters and Presidents, 57 Tutors, 
205 Lecturers, 54 Directors or Supervisors of Studies, 25 
Deans and sub-Deans, 29 Bursars and Treasurers, 4 
Auditors, 16 Praelectors, 19 Librarians, 17 Chaplains, 
Catechists and Readers, 16 Stewards, 8 Organists and 
Choirmasters, 1 Head-Examiner, and 1 Registrary — a 
total of 480 officials of one kind or another. Many of 
these persons hold more than one office, but when full 
allowance has been made for duplication, it is still true 
that the system is cumbrous and costly. No one would 
dream of setting it up, if he were starting de novo. Such 
then are some of the results of each College striving to be 
a University on its own account. It may be magnificent, 
but it is not economical education. 

Facts like those mentioned above have not been 
without their effect. Since 1856 great strides have been 
made in the direction of cooperation between the 
Colleges. Some account of these will be given later on. 
Meantime the question arises as to what is the logical 
outcome of this policy. Cooperation had admittedly not 
been carried as far as it is either possible or desirable. 
How far, it may be asked, is that ? The growing power of 
the University, increased Inter-Collegiate action — these 



308 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

are the outstanding features of the last 60 years. Putting 
the two together, is not the result certain in the end 
to be a unified University ? 

There is thus encouragement to ask where the 
essence of the College system lies, because if that can be 
preserved, opposition will be diminished, and the path of 
less, if not of least, resistance at length be open. There 
will be no dispute that it lies in its Tutorial and domestic 
functions. A College was in its origin a house or home 
for students. English opinion shrinks from the homeless 
condition of the undergraduates in Edinburgh or Berlin. 
It likes to think of them as safely housed under protecting 
and guiding influences. It may be that it idealises Oxford 
and Cambridge in this respect, but the belief is still 
strong in "the truly invaluable element of the College 
system — the close action of the teacher on the pupil, of 
the matured character on the unformed, of the instructed 
on the learning mind, not without a very beneficial 
reaction of the young on the aging man." ' So, too, 
Lord Curzon speaks of " the inestimable advantages of 
the College system, with its associations of mingled 
tenderness and pride, and the moral influence of its 
society and training," of " the endurance of the Collegiate 
ideal " as " one of the most remarkable and the most 
eloquent features of modern Oxford," of " the indescribable 
glamour of College Society " ; and, again, of " the wonderful 
growth of personal tuition which has sprung up in our 
midst almost unawares, and has provided the student 
with an instructor — half master and half friend." 

The College officer par excellence is the Tutor, and the 
two things which make a College are the Tutorial system 
and the corporate life. If these are preserved, everything 
else is of secondary importance. Assuming, then, that a 
College performs three kinds of work, (1) Administrative, 
(2) Educational, and (3) Tutorial, these are here arranged 
in an ascending order of importance. 

The centralisation of College administration should 
thus be the least difficult part of the problem of a unified 

i Pattison, Suggestions, p. 78. Pattison draws a distinction between 
(1) the tutorial and (2) the domestic influence. His eloquent words refer 
to (1). The domestic influence, i.e. the association of undergraduates 
with one another (for there is little contact between them and their 
seniors), he describes as neither " ascetic nor purifying." 



SUGGESTIONS. 309 

University. The chief administrative officers are the 
Bursar and the Steward, the one looking after the College 
property and finances, the other after its internal 
economy. The undergraduates very often do not know 
who the College Bursar is. They may occasionally come 
across the Steward if the custom of the College allows 
representatives of their number to complain to him 
about the dinner in Hall. Bursars and Stewards are 
practically outside the corporate life, or so little in it 
that both might disappear without the Collegiate system 
being seriously affected. The same may be said of the 
Tutors so far as they take Caution money, send out 
College bills and receive payment of them. 

Lord Curzon, at the end of his chapter on the Revenue 
and Expenditure of the University of Oxford, 1 formulates 
a weighty conclusion : "As I have advanced further in 
the study of the subject, it has been borne in upon 
me with increasing conviction that the clue to the 
majority of University problems, and the condition of 
the majority of University reforms, is finance : that 
financial reform means financial control : and that 
until such control is established decisive progress 
cannot be made." If then finance is of such import- 
ance to the University, and of so little importance to the 
essence of the Collegiate system, we may pass to the 
consideration of it with some degree of confidence. 

The 17 Cambridge Colleges have between them 29 
Bursars and Treasurers and 4 Auditors. Each Bursar 
has his own room or rooms, and his clerk or clerks. A 
College has also its firm of solicitors and its land agent or 
agents, to speak of no other necessary officials. If all the 
work here indicated were done in common, obviously it 
could be done more cheaply and better, because the level 
of the worst work could be brought up to the level of the 
best. The Bursar's Office never seems quite to fit in with 
the rest of the College. The aim of the institution is 
educational, not financial, and there is an inappro- 
priateness in taking a scholar from his proper work 
and setting him to purely commercial operations. To 
argue thus is to repeat what has often been said before. 



i Principles and Methods, p. 171. 



310 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Mark Pattison and Goldwin Smith differed in most of 
their views, but they agreed in recommending a unified 
administration of College property. "Why," asks the 
former in words already quoted, " should not the 
Colleges be relieved of the burden of management of 
their property, and throw their accounts into the same 
office, with proper provision for superintendence, in 
which the University business is to be conducted ? " 
and Goldwin Smith (also before quoted) says : " The 
time of persons devoted to education ought not to be 
spent in the management of estates. . . It would, 
in truth, be a good thing for the Colleges if their 
property were in the funds." 

This last assertion that the Colleges ought to sell 
their lands and invest the proceeds in trustee securities is 
sure to be contested, but it is worth examination as 
clearing the way for a centralised administration. The 
Quarterly Reviewer, in the article mentioned above, says : 
" The Colleges are great land-owners, and have the out- 
goings of land-owners. Though the expenses of the estate 
management are only about 7 per cent, of the revenues 
arising from the estates, yet .£130,000 a year are spent on 
management, repairs and improvements on the estates, 
rates and taxes, interest on loans, and the maintenance of 
the costly College buildings in Cambridge." The question 
inevitably arises, Ought the Colleges to be great land- 
owners '? Are they fitted for the task '? Land-owning is 
an expensive occupation, and those who follow it have to 
be content with a very low return. Just now many land- 
lords are putting their estates on the market ; they are 
tired of bearing the ancestral burdens of ownership, and 
are attracted by the higher rate of interest obtainable 
from other forms of investment and the reduction of their 
labours to the simple task of receiving periodical divi- 
dends. Would not the Colleges do well to follow their 
example '? 

The College farms are scattered over a wide area. The 
bulk of them are in Cambridgeshire and the neighbouring 
counties, but the Royal Commission Report of 1872 
showed that at the date mentioned Clare owned landed 
estate in Yorkshire; Caius in Devonshire and Dorset; 
King's in Dorset, Wiltshire, Devonshire, and Lancashire ; 



SUGGESTIONS. 311 

St. Catharine's in Yorkshire ; Christ's in Gloucestershire 
and Pembrokeshire; St. John's in Yorkshire; Magdalene in 
Anglesey, Carnarvonshire and Wiltshire ; and Trinity in 
Yorkshire and Westmoreland. Land wants to be looked 
after by some one on the spot. All these estates cannot 
be properly administered from Cambridge, and they must 
be either more or less neglected, or put in the hands of 
agents, which is always a costly arrangement. 

The reader may here be reminded of certain figures 
given in Chapter XI. It was there shown that the gross 
receipts of the University of Oxford and its Colleges were 
£318,000 in 1883, and £387,000 in 1911, an increase of 
£69,000; but the net receipts were respectively £206,000 
and £226,000, an increase of only £20,000. The balance 
of £49,000 represented additional expenditure. Well may 
Mr. Price complain of the ever-increasing burden of rates, 
taxes, repairs and improvements ; nor is there any prospect 
of a change for the better. 

College sentiment, it must be again admitted, will be 
strongly against the change here advocated, a sentiment 
which Lord Curzon well voices. 1 " It is doubtful whether 
landlords more broad-minded or considerate than the 
Colleges could anywhere be found; and were the tenants 
allowed a voice in their own destiny, few would probably 
not resent a change. The relations between the Colleges 
and their estates have lasted in many cases for centuries, 
and have engendered a feeling of combined attachment 
and obligation which it would seem a pity to disturb. 
The Estates-Bursars, who manage the estates on behalf 
of the Colleges, have the stimulus of devotion to their 
College, instead of a merely professional connexion with 
the estates ; and the visitation of the College Heads — 
many of whom are exceedingly conscientious in this 
respect— together with some of the Fellows, are warmly 
welcomed by the tenants." 

There is an economic side to this idyllic picture. The 
writer of a special article on " Oxford College Estates " a 
puts it thus : — " As the agricultural properties of many 
of the Colleges are very scattered, it follows that their 
tenants are often left very much to themselves. This 

i Principles, pp. 158-9. 2 The Times, May 26th, 1913. 



312 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

policy is not unpopular with the average farmer, who 
appreciates the absence of restrictions, and dislikes what 
he regards as excessive supervision. From the landlord's 
point of view, the policy is successful with a good tenant, 
but must be disastrous in the case of a bad one, and its 
fruits may sometimes be seen in neglected buildings and 
fences and badly farmed land. . . The rents of the 
farms are usually low, probably because it has been 
decided that, where constant supervision is difficult, it is 
more important to retain good and contented tenants 
than to secure an increase in the College revenues which 
might be only temporary." It would be interesting also 
to learn whether the labourers on the estates are all as 
contented with their cottages as the farmers are with 
their rents. 

At Cambridge there is, I think, less sentiment than at 
Oxford, though the same kind of feeling undoubtedly 
exists. The economic facts are the same in both cases. 
They may be thus briefly summarised : — (1) Land-owning 
requires exceptional knowledge and skill, and is at best 
an expensive luxury ; (2) College lands are often let at less 
than their economic rent ; (3) they are widely scattered, 
and therefore of more than average difficulty to manage. 
Efficiency is a ruthless word, and it may seem cruel to do 
away with a very picturesque if out-of-date system ; but if 
the interests of national education demand it, it will have 
to be done. 

House property stands in a different class. It is 
easier to look after, and, in certain cases, holds out hopes 
of an expanding revenue. Where this expectation can be 
justified, it may be kept; otherwise it should be sold, 
especially if it is old, and repairs are an increasing item. 
Building leases would naturally be held till their expira- 
tion. In any case there should be administration in 
common for the sake of economy. 

What is here suggested does not necessitate the 
pooling of the College revenues. A Central Board would 
collect the income, discharge the liabilities, and hand 
over to each College its own share, less its proportion of 
the cost of administration, and its contribution to 
the Common University Fund. There would be joint 
management and separate account keeping. 



SUGGESTIONS. 313 

After the Bursars come the Stewards, in whose hands 
is the domestic management of the Colleges. In some of 
these institutions, according to tradition, it is the cook 
who is the richest man. Encouraged by this example of 
successful private enterprise, other Colleges have taken to 
running their own kitchens, not without profit, but 
combination would produce still better results. Between 
3,500 and 4,000 men dine daily in Hall during Term. Many 
of them have other meals sent in from the kitchens. 
Here is a fine, steady business which might either be 
managed by a central body, or be let on contract under 
proper conditions in the open market. An enterprising 
management would improve on the present system and 
enable the undergraduates to live more cheaply and better 
at the same time. A like choice of courses is open with 
regard to the rest of the bodily wants of the inmates, and 
the worry about gyps, bed-makers, helps, waiters, coal- 
porters, boot-blacks, laundresses and all the rest of them 
would be taken away from men of learning, and be borne 
by people with a greater relish for business details. 

There remains the maintenance of existing buildings 
and the erection of new ones. Why should not there be 
a University Board or a department of a University 
Board doing these things for the Colleges in common ? In 
time such a Board might even attempt Fire Insurance. 

There is another matter of great importance which 
falls to be mentioned here. Lord Curzon has .the follow- 
ing remarks 1 : — "Different standards of expenditure pre- 
vail in different Colleges, some spending more on build- 
ings, upkeep and repairs, others on purely educational 
objects. One College spends from income, another uses 
the facilities offered by the Board of Agriculture to raise 
loans. I take the case of a single College which appears 
to illustrate these idiosyncrasies of practice in a marked 
degree : — 



Income from Lands and Houses at rack rent 
Repairs and Improvements 
Payment to Common University Fund 
Total contribution to University Purposes 



i Principles and Methods, pp. 154, loo. 



1906 


1907 


£ 


£ 


18,438 


18,725 


7,781 


6,724 


275 


233 


2,775 


2,733 



314 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

The figures of these years show that this College is 
in the habit of charging its estate repairs and improve- 
ments, even when they amount to so large a percentage' 
of the estate receipts, to the income of the year. Other i 
Colleges meet such expenditure, if called for, by a loan.! 
(The College in question has, meanwhile, contracted; 
loans since 1905 of i'28,000; apparently in connexion withl 
College buildings and a new residence for its Head.) The i 
significance of these figures to the University is very\ 
great, because it is obvious that had the usual practice t 
of raising loans for large external expenditure beem 
followed, the payment to the Common University Fundi 
would have been much larger. For the protection of* 
University interests, and for the maintenance of some* 
uniformity in administration, it might be desirable tot 
enact by Statute that College expenditure on repairs and 
improvements, external and internal, should not exceed 
in any one year a fixed percentage of the net income." 
Lord Curzon then points out other anomalies and discre- 
pancies, and draws the conclusion that " they are the 
inevitable consequences of a system in which there is 
no controlling authority beyond the Governing Bodies 
of the Colleges themselves, and in which the University, 
outside the pale of its statutory rights, is powerless to> 
intervene. . . At the present moment there is no 
force beyond public opinion — a not too certain check — 
to prevent a rich College from spending a dispropor- 
tionate amount of its income upon buildings. These 
may or may not be necessary. Probably, in the great 
majority of instances they are. But when it is 
remembered that in either case the University is 
penalized, in proportion to the outlay, it does not seem 
unreasonable that an independent scrutiny and a higher 
sanction should be required. Is it not probable, indeed,! 
that both University and Colleges would be the gainers: 
if some greater degree of uniformity could be introduced, 1 
and if certain broad guiding principles were laid down, to 
which, with reasonable latitude, all parties should be 
asked to conform ? "* 

The writer recurs to the same point at p. 160, under 

i lb. p. 157. 



SUGGESTIONS. 315 

the heading " The Management of College Estates." 
After pointing out various drawbacks to the present 
system, he continues: "Above all, there is no individual 
and no body to regulate, co-ordinate or control. Thus we 
may have, as has been shown, one College restricting its 
expenditure on repairs and improvements, and another 
College indulging in undue liberality ; different standards 
and scales of outlay exist side by side. It may be said 
that the same is true of private properties. But the 

, answer is that the College estates are not private 
properties; they are held in trust for the nation, and for 

i an object in which every man and woman in the nation 
is entitled to feel and to express a concern. It is there- 
fore reasonable that a special measure of vigilance should 

i be applied in their case ; and that the University, no less 

: than the public, should have some guarantee that these 

i large emoluments are being administered not only with 
propriety and without extravagance, but with a strict 
regard to the general object for which they were given, 
and with a due correlation to each other." 

The justice of these remarks cannot be questioned, 

I but the proposals are not as new as might be imagined. 

; Section 21 (3) of the Act of 1877 lays it down that " the 
Commissioners, in Statutes made by them, may from 

itime to time, if they think fit, make provision : — 

" (3) For regulating the exercise of the borrowing 
powers of the University or of a College." So far as I 
know, the Commissioners never exercised this power, but 

lit was clearly in the mind of Parliament that they should. 

[There will have to be statutory regulations of the character 

[indicated, and one of them must be that the consent of the 
University will have to be obtained, before a College is 

• allowed to raise money on loan. If this restriction is 
deemed unworthy and not to be borne, it should be remem- 
bered that every municipal body from the humblest 
Parish Council to the great municipal corporations like 
Liverpool, Birmingham and Manchester, or the London 
County Council, cannot borrow a single penny without 
the leave of the Local Government Board. They must all 
submit their proposals and justify the expenditure. They 
do so without suffering any sense of indignity. 

Another necessary reform is the public auditing of 



316 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

all University and College accounts in place of the 
private auditing now practised. 

One objection may be urged against certain of the 
above suggestions, quite apart from any question of College 
dignity and independence. It is that there is a risk in 
what may be called Stock Exchange investments owing 
to the gradual fall in the value of money. There is force 
in this contention, and the danger may be guarded 
against in two ways. The Colleges should be allowed to i 
write off whenever necessary a certain percentage each 
year for depreciation of their securities, and both the 
University and the Colleges ought annually to put a 
certain sum to reserve, so as not only to keep their 
property intact, but also to increase it with a view to i 
meeting future educational developments. 

To turn to the question of the necessary machinery. 
In the scheme mentioned in the Preface it was suggested 
that the Financial Board should undertake the work, 
but it might be better to set up an entirely new body. 
The Financial Board stands to the University somewhat 
as the Treasury does to the Government, and its Chairman 
is the nearest approach we have to a Chancellor of the 
Exchequer. The fresh functions to be discharged resemble 
rather those discharged by Somerset House and the Board 
of Works, which are separate Government offices. There 
might be a University Board of Management and Works, 
organised in two departments, the one for the management 
of College property and finance as a whole, and the other 
for such matters as repairs, buildings, commissariat, etc. , 
Its Chairman would be an ex officio member of the \ 
Council of the Senate. 

If the system outlined above was worked loyally and I 
efficiently, a saving would certainly result. How large it 
would be, it is impossible accurately to estimate, but it 
forms one of a number of possible savings which may 
fairly be expected to set the University free from its 
present financial embarrassments. 

The administrative work of the Colleges having been i 
dealt with, their educational or teaching work falls next 
to be considered. Here again College susceptibilities are 
certain to be aroused by any scheme of central supervision 
and control, but there are some considerations which 



SUGGESTIONS. 317 

should prevent calmness of judgment being unduly 
interfered with. Recent years have presented no more 
pleasing sight than the gradual growth of Inter-Collegiate 
teaching. Experience has proved that instruction thus 
given outside College does not in any way tend to the 
breaking down of the Collegiate system. Attendance at 
University and Inter-Collegiate lectures does not impair 
loyalty and affection to a man's own College. It would 
be possible, I imagine, to find a considerable body of 
undergraduates, Science men for the most part, who 
receive no instruction whatever within their own Colleges, 
and yet they are just as devoted to them as those 
who may never go outside for a single lecture. It ought 
to be possible then to consider a great extension of 
co-operative teaching without undue apprehension of 
possible disaster to the Collegiate system. 

Two classes of men have to be taught — the Poll men, 
and the Honours men. 

The Poll men are, practically speaking, wholly taught 
by the Colleges, 1 and their position will be considered 
later on. 

The teaching of the Honours men is divided between 
the University and the Colleges. There are no data 
available to show exactly what proportion of the work is 
done by each, but there are certain accessible facts which 
bear on the point. In the List of Lectures for 1912-13, 
issued by the authority of the General Board of Studies, 
a University body, instruction is offered under 21 heads — 
Agricultural Studies, Anthropology, Architectural Studies, 
Biology and Geology, Classics, Divinity, Economics and 
Politics, Foreign Service Students, Geographical Studies, 
History and Archaeology, Indian Civil Service, Law, 
Mathematics, Medicine, Mediaeval and Modern Languages, 
Military Subjects, Moral Science, Music, Oriental Studies, 
Physics and Chemistry, and the Teachers' Training 
Syndicate. These subjects may be classified in three 
divisions, (i) those in which the teaching is wholly or 
predominantly University; (ii) those in which the teaching 
is wholly or predominantly Collegiate ; and (iii) those in 
which the teaching is divided in varying proportions 

i A few Lectures in Science are provided for them by the University. 



318 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

between the University and the Colleges. This grouping 
works out as follows : — 

(1) University predominant. 

Agriculture, Anthropology, Architecture, Biology 
and Geology, Foreign Service, Geography, Indian i 
Civil Service, Medicine, Military Subjects, Physics 
(which includes Engineering) ,and Chemistry, 
Training of Teachers (11). 

(2) Colleges predominant. 

Classics, Divinity, Economics and Politics, History ] 
and Archaeology, Law, Mathematics, Music (7). 

(3) Divided. 

Mediaeval and Modern Languages, Moral Sciences, 
Oriental Studies (3). 
Even if this classification is criticised in detail, the 
deduction from it is plain and unassailable. To repeat 
what has already been pointed out, since 1850 the Univer- 
sity has been doing more and more of the teaching. 
Science and practical subjects are turning the scale in its- 
favour. This change has not weakened the Colleges. On 
the contrary, taken collectively, they are more flourishing 
than ever, and the Collegiate feeling is as strong as ever. 
What fault then, if any, can be found with the above 
mixed system of instruction ? Where it is worked by the 
University, little or none. It is unified and organised, and 
its defects are due to financial, not educational, causes. 
W r here the Colleges give the instruction there are the 
beginnings of better things, but not the full fruition. The 
Inter-Collegiate system is an immense advance on the : 
old state of things, when every College, large or small, 
lectured to its own students and to no others. There is 
co-operation, but only to a limited extent. What has 
been done, roughly speaking, is for each College to arrange 
its own lectures, and then to throw them open to 
members of other Colleges. There are periodical con- 
ferences of Lecturers; but these conferences seem, in Lord 
Curzon's words, " to register rather than revise." There 
is at present no adequate and complete scheme of I 
teaching. 

To justify this contention, let us attempt an analysis 
of one of the Lists of Lectures proposed by the General 
Board of Studies, — the Classical Lectures for the Lent 



SUGGESTIONS. 319 

Term of the current year 1913. 1 The Classical Tripos 
consists of two parts. In Part I. papers are set 
containing passages for translation from the best Greek 
and Latin authors, passages for translation into Greek 
and Latin Prose, and Greek and Latin Verse, and papers 
in Greek and Roman History and Antiquities, Philology 
and Syntax, Greek and Roman Philosophy, Greek and 
Latin Literature, Sculpture and Architecture. It will be 
sufficient if we confine our attention to Part I. alone. The 
best Greek and Latin authors may fairly be held to com- 
prise Aeschylus, Aristophanes, Aristotle, the Attic Orators, 
Demosthenes, Euripides, Herodotus, Hesiod, Homer, 
Pindar, Plato, Sophocles, Theocritus, and Thucydides 
for Greek; and Catullus, Cicero, Juvenal, Livy, Lucretius, 
Martial, Persius, Plautus, Pliny, Propertius, Suetonius, 
Tacitus and Tibullus for Latin ; to say nothing of 
Xenophon, Horace and Virgil, which may be omitted as 
school authors. Thirty-one sets of lectures appear in the 
list, 2 of which five are given by the University. As was 
stated above, the practice at Cambridge is not to give any 
set books for translation; passages are selected at the 
Examiners' pleasure from the best Greek and Latin 
authors. Translating unseen passages at sight is there- 
fore a very important part of the training, and a student 
is practised in it from school onwards. The Univer- 
sity as such makes no provision for such train- 
ing, nor does the Inter-Collegiate system of lectures. 
The same holds good of Composition. It will seem 
strange to an outsider that the University should not 
afford complete instruction in two most important 
subjects in which it holds an examination, and that it 
has never occurred to the Colleges to co-operate and fill 
the gap, but so it is. The work in question is done by 
/the Colleges individually ; and here is part of the 
explanation why the larger and richer Colleges win so 
many more first classes than the smaller and poorer. 
,They can afford to pay for specialists in each department 
of instruction, and the other Colleges cannot. 

i Cambridge University Reporter, January 11, 1913, pp. 508, 509. 

2 The two sets given at Selwyn are not included, as Selwyn is not a 
College in the sense in which the other 17 Colleges are. 



320 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Of the courses of lectures on the chief Classical 
authors the University give one — on Lucretius ; the 
Inter-Collegiate Lecturers give 11, on Aristotle, Ethics, 
Plato, Republic II.-IV., Plautus, Suetonius, Cicero, i 
ad Atticum, Aristophanes, Nubes, Aves, Thesmophor- 
iazusae, Cicero, pro Flacco and Verrine Orations. 
Our list above contained the names of 27 authors. The 
Lecture List contains the names of 6, the balance of i 
21 being totally unprovided for. Of the 11 courses, three t 
are on the same three books of Plato's Republic, and twot 
on the same' two comedies of Aristophanes, Nubes and! 
Aves. Roman History gets five sets of lectures, Greek 
History only one ; one course is divided between the two. i 
What would a German University say to such a scheme ? 
It is in the embryonic stage, excellent as embodying the e 
principle of co-operation, but needing to be carried very ; 
much further before it is even in sight of completion. 

The Report of the Committee on the Constitution 
and Government of the University before alluded to, has 
the following remarks on this point 1 : — 

" While in the different departments of Science and 
in certain other subjects the formal teaching is provided 
almost entirely by the University, in many subjects the 
greater part of the teaching is done by the staffs of the I 
different Colleges in formal lectures (which are almost all 
open to all members of the University), class work, or 
individual instruction. 

"In these subjects, in so far as the needs of the 
different studies are not met by Professors, Readers and : 
University Lecturers, the Committee believe that more i 
effective co-operation in the distribution of lectures 
between College Lecturers might be attained without 
interfering with the proper freedom of the Colleges in 
arranging their own teaching. They realise that, in some 
studies, it is necessary and desirable that more than one 
lecture on the same subject or the same branch of the 
subject should be given ; and that in some cases there is 
a manifest advantage in the lectures being addressed to 
an audience limited in number with whose needs the 
Lecturer is familiar. With this qualification, the lectures 

l pp. 12, 13. 



SUGGESTIONS. 321 

given by College Lecturers might be rendered more 
generally useful, both by the more effective revision of 
the lecture lists by the Special Boards, and by the 
voluntary association of Colleges for lecturing purposes. 

" Some combinations of Colleges are already at work ; 
and the Committee think that the principle might be 
extended and that much good might result from such 
association. The further development of the principle 
must be voluntary and in some degree experimental, but 
the Committee think it may be useful to record some of 
the results of such combinations as have been effected, 
though it is not in their power to make definite proposals. 

" In one instance the combination of three Colleges 
(originally the outcome of an informal arrangement made 
by the Tutors of two of them) has been extended to 
lectures in all subjects, which are open without fee to 
students of all the three Colleges. The lectures are 
arranged in consultation, the dates at which they should 
begin and end and the dates of the Annual Examinations 
(which are held in common) are jointly fixed. The com- 
bination, being more or less informal, has no definite 
rules : it is managed on a basis of give and take : it has 
been gradually developed, without friction, during thirty- 
five years ; and it seems to be accepted by all concerned 
as normal. 

"Another combination of Colleges has been practi- 
cally limited to lectures in Mathematics, Classics and 
Theology. Here also common Examinations are held. 

"A third group of Colleges has for many years been 
associated for lectures in Mathematics, and this group 
has recently been enlarged and certain parts of the 
Mechanical Sciences course have been included in its 
scope. 

"In these groups the provision of lectures open to 
all the Colleges in the group is supplemented by class 
work or work with individuals, in each College, generally 
confined to the members thereof. 

"Another combination, restricted to Theology, has 
more recently been formed. 

" It is obvious that co-operation of Colleges for 
this purpose leads to efficiency and economy in lectures. 
Fewer formal lectures are needed, and thus the burden 



322 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

of each Lecturer is lessened. And, further, students have 
the advantage of hearing a greater variety of lectures. 
The combination of Colleges has largely reduced the 
number of separate examinations, and this practice 
might be still further extended Avith advantage. 

" The combination between Colleges might be still 
more effective if Colleges, thus connected, consulted each 
other informally in making an election to a Fellowship or 
a Lectureship, when the needs of the different studies in 
the group might be considered. 

" The co-operation of the Colleges might usefully be 
extended to the direction of studies and class work in 
subjects such as History, Modern Languages, Law and 
Economics, in which each College has not usually a full 
staff of Lecturers. 

" It has been suggested, as a further mode of combi- 
nation, that in some subjects, in which teaching is 
provided in unequal degrees by different Colleges, the 
Colleges might contribute (in proportion to the number 
of their students in the subject, or otherwise) to a joint 
fund from which Lecturers should be paid." 

As for University teaching, the Committee think 
that the initiative for the provision of further University 
teaching must come either from the General Board of 
Studies or from the Special Boards of Studies, 1 and that 
it is desirable that the constitution of the Special Boards 
should be reformed so as to make them more fully 
representative of the teachers. 2 

All these suggestions are sound and good as far as 
they go ; what they lack is courage. There is too much 
fear of interfering with what is called " the proper free- 
dom of the Colleges in arranging their own teaching," 
which leads the Committee to say that " it is not in their 
power to make definite proposals." Is the teaching the 
private property of the Colleges ? Are they not, by the law 
of the land, national institutions, and bound to look upon 
themselves in that light ? Is not Lord Curzon right when 
he describes them as trustees, and that for an object in 
which every man and woman in the nation is entitled to 
feel and express a concern ? 

i lb. p. 10. 2 lb. p. 11. 



SUGGESTIONS. B23 

The way of salvation lies along the path tentatively 
marked out in the above extracts. The University must 
come in as the unifying and coordinating authority in all 
the Honour teaching, given either by itself or by the 
Colleges. The machinery lies ready to hand in the 
General Board of Studies and the Special Boards of 
Studies ; it only requires to be adapted to present-day 
needs. The Report of the Council of the Senate on the 
Constitution and Government of the University says 1 : — 

"A considerable change is proposed in the constitu- 
tion of the General Board of Studies. In the opinion of 
the Council, the General Board is at present too large. A 
reduction in size is impossible if the attempt is made to 
maintain the separate representation of all the bodies 
now represented upon it. The proposal which is now 
made is intended to provide a Board of reasonable size, 
while maintaining generally a representative character. 

" These proposals are embodied in the following 
scheme : — 

" That the General Board of Studies shall consist of 
the Vice-Chancellor and sixteen members of the Senate, 
to be elected on the nomination of the Council of the 
Senate. Four shall be nominated in each year. Not 
fewer than four members of the Board shall be Professors. 
The Council shall, in making the nominations, have 
regard to the representation of studies." 

As for the Special Boards of Studies, attention may 
be drawn in this connexion to the Report of the Com- 
mittee before referred to' 2 : "The Committee think that 
under the considerable powers already possessed by the 
Special Boards and the General Board, steps might be 
taken to make the organisation of Lectures more effective. 
. . . The Committee are of opinion that it is desirable : 

(1) That the constitution of the Special Boards of 
Studies should be reformed so as to make them more fully 
representative of the teachers. 

(2) That the list of Lectures for the ensuing 
academic year should be considered by the Special Boards 
in the Lent Term of each year, and should be sent to the 

i University Reporter, March 1, 1910, pp. 680-681. 
2 Report, p. 11. 



324 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

General Board of Studies before the end of the Lent 
Term, in order that the General Board may have proper 
time in the Easter Term to consider the lists and to 
approve them or remit them for further consideration 
with alterations and amendments. 

(3) That in the preparation of the Lecture lists due 
regard should be paid to the grading of Lectures for 
students of different ability and attainments. 

(4) That Lectures proposed by the Special Boards 
should be arranged to begin on or about the same date ; 
that this date should be as near as possible to the begin- 
ning of Full Term ; and that the Colleges should be asked 
to make common arrangements for the commencement of 
residence." 

These last words deserve a brief comment. As the 
University has no control over who are to be its students, 
so it has no control over the precise date in each term at 
which they shall begin their studies. Each College fixes 
for itself the day on which its undergraduates shall 
" come up." The above extract shows that they do not 
all light on the same day. There are thus different times 
for the beginning of residence and also for the beginning 
of lectures. Hence a certain amount of confusion and 
loss of time. The authors of the Report suggest that 
" the Colleges should be asked to make common arrange- 
ments " ; that the University should be master in its own 
house and settle the dates for coming into residence and 
beginning work has obviously not occurred to them. 

Let us then suppose that the alterations suggested 
above have been carried out, that the Boards have been 
made the proper size, and satisfactorily representative in 
character. Something more will remain to be done. The 
General Board of Studies excited great hopes when it 
was first instituted, but it has proved a disappointment. 
It has not organised the teaching work of the University 
as was expected. The reason is not far to seek. The 
Report from which we have quoted considers the 
" Teaching for Honours-Examinations" under two heads — 
(I.) Lectures proposed by the Special Boards of Studies ; 
and (II.) College Lectures. They say : " The lists of lectures 
proposed by the Special Boards include lectures by 
Professors, Readers and University Lecturers, and lectures 



SUGGESTIONS. 325 

by College Lecturers and others." l This is quite accurate, 
but the significance of it may be lost on the outsider. 
The instruction here alluded to is only part of what is 
given. The rest comes under (II.) College Lectures ; and 
here, as has before been pointed out, the Report insists on 
" the proper freedom of the Colleges in arranging their 
own teaching." 2 This is the rock on which the General 
Board of Studies has split. There is a large area outside 
its jurisdiction, and until it is made supreme over the 
whole field of instruction the old evils will not be 
removed. The Board must be given control over both 
University and College teaching. It must be able to 
make " regulations and instructions in respect to the 
subjects and character of the lectures to be delivered " 
not only by the University but by the Colleges. 

Two of the three kinds of work performed by a 
College have now been examined — the Administrative and 
the Educational. There remains the third kind, — the 
Tutorial. This must remain untouched. The task of 
supervising the studies and morals of the undergraduates 
can be far better discharged locally than by a centralised 
body. The Colleges need fear no attack at this point. 
They will always retain their Tutorial functions, so far as 
one can see, and nothing can deprive them of their 
corporate life, save the forcible closing of their doors. 
Let us then return with minds made easier to the con- 
sideration of the work of teaching. 

There are difficulties still to be overcome. The 
Colleges with their widely varying resources in the shape 
of men to teach and money to pay them, and with their 
fluctuating numbers, might find grave, if not insuperable 
obstacles in the way of their joining and playing an 
effective part in such a scheme as has been sketched 
above. The fluctuation in numbers is especially serious. 
For instance, a College which had " for centuries humbly 
reposed at, or close to, the bottom in point of size," could 
not " almost at a bound rise to the head of the second 
rank " without greatly disturbing, if not altogether up- 
setting, a centralised scheme of teaching. Some plan 
must be found of equalising resources, and preventing or 

lp. 11. 2 p. 12. 



326 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

minimising fluctuations. Nothing seems to meet the 
case but a closer combination of the Colleges ; but this is 
such dangerous ground that it will be the height of rash- 
ness to tread on it without some backing of authority. 
That backing will be found to be much stronger than 
most people are aware. 

The first witness to be called is Sir William Hamilton,' 
who held that " In the smaller Colleges it might be 
advantageous, if two at least combined, and had in 
common a single complement of Tutors." Some of the 
evidence given at Cambridge before the Royal Com- 
mission of 1850, points the same way. The Rev. J. W. 
Blakesley said : 2 "I believe that the same degree of 
efficiency as at Trinity might be secured in the smaller 
Colleges by a confederation of three or four for the 
purposes of Tuition. An arrangement might be made 
between the Tutors of these for a classification of their 
pupils, and for securing the advantage of the division of 
labour in lecturing. I do not see the impossibility of 
extending the union still further, to the free election of 
Scholars and Fellows indifferently from among the 
students of the Colleges so united. And I am disposed 
to think that such a confederation, if the terms of union 
were framed on a liberal basis, and the arrangement 
carried out in a generous spirit by the individuals who 
were parties to it, would in some respects secure the 
advantages now possessed by the large Colleges, and 
escape the drawbacks. For instance, a union of four 
Colleges, which in the aggregate mustered as large a 
number of students as Trinity, would be able to secure 
equally efficient lectures, and at the same time would 
supply a much better accommodation in Hall and Chapel, 
and be free from the evils attendant on an accumulation 
of very great numbers within the same walls." 

Dean Merivale gave evidence to the like effect : — 
"With our existing distinction of large and small 
Colleges, it seems impossible for the smaller to give 
uniformly and permanently the same security for efficient 
tuition which may perhaps be afforded by the larger. . . 
An arrangement by which three or four small Colleges 

i Discussions, p. 805. 2 Evidence, p. 150. 



SUGGESTIONS. 327 

could be united for the purposes of tuition, by opening 
their emoluments one to the other, and extending the 
circle from which elections to Scholarships and Fellow- 
ships could be made, would be of immense importance, as 
it would allow of a fair competition between the Colleges 
which does not now exist." 

It is only right to add that the Commissioners them- 
selves rejected this solution in the following passage ' :— 
" To meet such difficulties it has been proposed to group 
several such Societies (i.e. small Colleges) into a confede- 
ration for the purpose of giving their instruction in 
common. But we are inclined to think there would be 
found in practice objections almost insuperable to such a 
mode of proceeding, and at best it would require a combi- 
nation of so many conditions to be satisfied, that we 
cannot be induced to rely upon it with any confidence of 
success." 

Mark Pattison, greatly daring, proposed to amalgamate 
Merton with Corpus Christi College, and to dedicate the 
united College to the study of Biology, Chemistry, and the 
allied branches. 2 Goldwin Smith's opinion has already 
been quoted in Chapter VIII. " It seems to be generally 
acknowledged that the system under which each College 
attempts to be a University in itself must be abandoned, 
and that the Colleges must combine among themselves 
and with the University Professoriate for the purposes of 
instruction." Lord Curzon brings forward the same idea 
in a different connexion. "It has been suggested that 
two or three Colleges might be thrown into one, with the 
result of a considerable saving in respect of College 
officers and servants."' The President of Magdalen 
College, Oxford, in his address as Vice-Chancellor, in 
1907, made special mention of this last suggestion as 
effecting economies by the fusion of two or more Colleges. 

The Cambridge Memorandum appended to the Royal 
Commission Report of 1874 has already been quoted. It 
says: "Provision could be made for the association of the 
Colleges, or some of them, for educational purposes, so as 
to secure more efficient teaching and to allow to the 
teachers more leisure for private study." 

i Report, p. 79. 2 Suggestions, p. 157. 

3 Principles and Methods, p. 70. 



328 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

But the strongest authority which can be adduced for 
the proposal is the legislation which followed the Report. 
Clause 22 of the Act of 1877, which has been already set 
out, 1 enacted that the Commissioners in statutes made 
by them might provide for "the union of Colleges and 
Halls and institutions, or combination for education," as 
the marginal note reads. Parliament did not set up this 
machinery for the fun of the thing ; it intended that it 
should be taken advantage of. At least it put on record 
a principle. Has not the time come when this principle 
should be seriously considered ? 

What may be called the Act-of-1877-policy might be 
worked out and completed as follows, the Colleges being 
divided into six groups, Trinity counting as a group by 
itself: — 

Undergraduates Gross corporate Assessable 

College. on books. income. income. 

£ £ 

1. Trinity 672 76,492 55,393 

2. Trinity Hall 146 ) 8,828 ) 8,138 ) 
Clare 201 [ 674 1H,558 [ 55,025 12,924 [ 45,992 
Caius 327 ) 29,639 ) 24,930 ) 

3. King's 166 ) 37,654 "\ 25,640 •) 
Queens' 181 f 8,686 ( - 7,843 ( ^ M2 
St, Catb.'s 129 { 5bl 6,063 ( ° 4 ' 72 8 5,719 ( 50 ' 012 
Corpus 85 ) 12,325 ) 10,810 ) 

4. Pembroke 293 ") 13,896 ^ 13,542 "i 



Peterhouse 81 [ 490 8,212 [ 32,096 6,758 [ 27,432 

Downing 116 ) 9,988 ) 7,132 ) 

5. Emmanuel 192 ") 19,885 ) 17,735 ) 
Christ's 227 [ 531 14,943 [ 49,780 12,133 [ 40,726 
Sidney 112 ) 14,952 ) 10,858 ) 

6. St. John's 244 ) 42,945 ) 33,344 ) 
Jesus 212 [ 571 13,505 [ 63,381 12,968 [ 52,421 
Magdalene 115 ) 6,931 ) 6,109 ) 

The principle here adopted is the necessary one of 
propinquity. The result is six groups of fairly equal 
size and resources, the weak spot being No. 4 — Pembroke, 
Peterhouse and Downing. If any further approximation to 
equality was desired, it might be attained by graduating 

i See above, p. 224. It is worthy of note that the Executive Com- 
mission under the Act of 1877 had many powers which have never found 
their way into operation. Those relating to the regulation of borrowing 
by a College, the renewal of beneficial leases, and the union of Colleges 
have already been mentioned. The power to found University Scholar- 
ships for poor men, and to transfer a College Library or a portion thereof 
will be referred to later on. 



SUGGESTIONS. 329 

the payments to the Common University Fund, as is 
done at Oxford. On the figures given above all the 
groups might be taxed at the same rate up to £27,500, 
and then a super-tax might be levied on each £'1,000 of 
assessable income over and above that minimum. An 
extra endowment of £250,000, divided between Peterhouse 
and Downing, would also be a great help. The principle 
of emulation cannot be dispensed with while the state 
of public opinion with regard to education remains as 
it is ; but these groups could compete on something like 
a fair footing, and not in the hopelessly unequal fashion 
that the separate Colleges do now. Fluctuations in 
numbers would also be stopped, or at least rendered 
less severe, for a group of three or four Colleges would 
be much more stable than the single unit. If one 
member of the group went down, the chances are that 
one of the others would go up. It would thus become 
possible for the University to organise and coordinate 
all the teaching given within its borders. Its instru- 
ment, the General Board of Studies, might not shrink 
from driving six well-matched horses together, though 
it might well hesitate before attempting the same task 
with seventeen steeds of such varying size, strength and 
pace. 

The necessity of organising the teaching ma}* also be 
pressed from the purely University point of view. For 
the last sixty years the cry has been for more Professor- 
ships, Readerships, and Lectureships, and there has been 
a great increase in the number of these posts during that 
time. But good as all this increase in teaching power 
may have been, it is of paramount importance to fit the 
newcomers into a properly organised and coordinated 
scheme, otherwise their work may be wasted. It is doubt- 
ful whether all these fresh appointments have justified 
expectations. If they have not, it is the system which is 
mainly to blame. 

But this is not the whole of the matter. Instruction 
at Cambridge cannot be considered fully organised unless 
a succession of the best teachers has been secured. To 
this end it is necessary, (1) to give the intending teachers 
suitable training, and (2) to open a career before them. 
This latter implies three things : («) sufficient pay from 



330 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

the beginning ; (6) a reasonable prospect of promotion ; 
and (c) a pension when work is done. Sad to say, all these 
three are yet lacking. 

For elementary education — the simplest form of teach- 
ing — it is recognised that training is necessary, and the 
machinery for giving it is highly elaborated and effective. . 
The power of imparting instruction in a Secondary 
School or in a University is supposed to be a spontaneous 3 
gift of nature. Teachers in these higher walks are born, , 
not made ; and to train them is regarded as a waste of I 
time. How many teachers are there in the University of f 
Cambridge who have been specially prepared for their r 
work ? Some few Secondary School teachers are receiving * 
training ; and if they ever recruit the ranks of the j 
University teachers, the University will indirectly get a t 
trained staff, but not otherwise. One can here only note ■ 
the facts, as suggestions for supplying the training are • 
outside the purpose of these pages. 1 

A very frequent complaint of the University reformers 
from the first has been that teaching at Oxford and 
Cambridge is not a career. The professions, the Civil 
Service, the world of business, all present greater attrac- 
tions, and offer richer prizes; the result being that the 1 
majority of the enterprising men will not stay on 
at the Universities. This is, of course, quite true, and 
must always be so. A teacher at Cambridge can 
never make as much money as a successful barrister, or r 
physician, or merchant prince, but his prospects might t 
be made much better than they are. At present the 
plan followed by the Colleges, and to a lesser extent by 
the University, is to take a young man of 22 or 23 who 
has gained a high place in a Tripos, and put him straight I 
away to teaching without any previous training. A 
College gives this young man a Lectureship, and because 
a Lectureship is poorly paid, it adds thereto a Fellowship, 
which is to be retained so long as the duty of teaching is - 
discharged. This method of procedure cannot be deemed i 
ideal, either for the College or for the individual himself. 
The appointment is at best an experiment, and may turn 

1 The training of Secondary Teachers is touched on in various places 
in the Report of the Royal Commission on Secondary Education, 1895. 
See pp. 70, 71, 80, 198-209, 321-323. 



SUGGESTIONS. 381 

out well or ill. Some such experiments turn out ill. 
A certain number of the men who are thus appointed 
never acquire the art of imparting the knowledge which 
they possess, they are dull and uninspiring, and they 
remain a perplexity to the College, a stumbling-block 
in the way of the students, and ill at ease with them- 
selves. There is another way in which this system is bad 
for individuals. It gives them too much to begin with, 
and it offers them no further prospects. A Lecture- 
ship plus a Fellowship may not be intrinsically of high 
pecuniary value, but it seems so to a young man who 
conies fresh from an examination, and who has never 
earned anything before. After a time the teacher takes 
stock of the situation. He finds that the College has 
done all for him that he can expect it to do for many 
years to come. The Master bids fair to be another proof 
of the longevity which is associated with that office 
in the public mind, the Senior Tutor will in his turn 
be made Master, and there are other men who by 
virtue of their standing have a prior claim on any 
Tutorship which may fall vacant. Ambition is thus 
quenched, and an acquiescence in the inevitable takes its 
place. The more alert and active of the young graduates 
look down upon the life of the average Don ; and, 
attractive as teaching may be to them, they see the 
Capuan clangers of Cambridge, and betake themselves 
to careers where they have greater scope. 

These disadvantages may be minimised, even if they 
cannot be altogether avoided. Proper training being 
conceded, the question of adequate payment next arises. 
The financial difficulty is always with us, and here it 
meets us in the shape of the Fellowship system. The 
Oxford Accounts for 1907 show a sum of 4'61,550 19s. lOd. 
paid to Fellows. The Quarterly Reviewer of 1906 reckoned 
the corresponding Cambridge figure at £63,000. The 
exact amounts do not matter for the present argument ; 
it is enough to know that they are large, and are not 
directly paid for teaching. The whole question of the 
Fellowships thus comes up for consideration. 

Few institutions have undergone more frequent and 
striking changes than Fellowships. Originally allowances 
on the most meagre scale, with laborious courses of study 



332 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

attached to them, payable only to members of a particular 
church, and that on condition of poverty, celibacy, and 
residence ; they have become comfortable sinecures, with 
no duties attached, tenable by any academically qualified 
person possessed of any amount of money, who may 
marry and reside where he pleases. Mark Pattison 
thus describes the course of these changes 1 : " The old 
Statutes imposed very strict conditions of tenure. For 
they had, in almost every instance, required the Fellows 
to proceed to the superior degree in one of the Faculties. 
Failure to do so was to forfeit the Fellowship, ipso facto. 
The effect of this requirement, under the old University 
system, was to impose upon the Fellow, as the condition 
of his tenure, a prolonged course of study of from twenty 
to twenty-five years, in a special branch of knowledge — 
study not merely private and uncertificated, but evidenced 
by a regular appearance in the public schools for disputa- 
tion, and by the performance of other public exercises. 
These exercises had been long disused by the University, 
and dispensed with for the degrees. The College Fellow 
was unable to perform the public disputations and was 
content to take the degree. In many of the larger founda- 
tions the College Statutes had not merely imposed the 
Faculty Degree, with its necessary course of study, but had 
superadded private courses of study for the Fellows, with 
extra disputations and exercises, as tests of proficiency to 
be given within the College walls. These had fallen into 
desuetude along Avith the public exercises. For the public 
University and private Collegiate appearances and exer- 
cises no substitute had been provided. These exercises 
and disputations were, however, only the outward tokens ; 
the tests, occasions, and evidence of study, or continued 
pursuit of acquirement ; they were not that study itself. 
Though the opportunity of publicly proving his pro- 
ficiency was taken away from him, the Fellow still 
remained under the same obligation to the study which 
had constituted the whole purpose of his foundation. 

" This was the statutable state of things when the Act 
of 1854 and the Commission intervened. . . The Ordi- 
nances which emanated from it in every instance abolish 

i Suggestions, pp. 88-90; cf. pp. 124-12 7 for further details. For the 
method of awarding these prizes at Oxford see pp. 94-98. 



SUGGESTIONS. 333 

the statutable regulations of studies and exercises, as 
well as the obligation to proceed to the superior degree. 
In no case do they attempt to substitute an equivalent. 
But though no duties are provided for him to perform, 
the Fellow is maintained in the enjoyment of his stipend 
and emoluments. In other words, the Ordinances of the 
Commission of 1854 converted the Fellowships into sine- 
cures. The Commissioners found an enormous abuse 
subsisting illegally and they legalised it. . . They took 
the title-deeds, erased the original national and noble 
purpose, and returned the parchments smilingly to their 
owners. Was it ignorance of University history, or want 
of sympathy with science and learning, or timidity?" 

The Cambridge Commissioners of 1850 had no doubt 
of their own view. They say : l " The Fellowships cannot 
but be regarded as the chief source of life and vigour to 
the whole academical system. However valuable may be 
the various honours which the University bestows on 
the successful candidates for its numerous prizes, and 
however stimulating the competition for honourable 
places in the different Triposes, it is, after all, the College 
Fellowship which must be regarded as the chief motive to 
exertion, and the great reward of successful industry and 
talent." In other words, they believed in the principle of 
emulation, and they found it in the Prize Fellowship 
system. 

Experience, however, proved that Prize Fellowships 
involved serious disadvantages. The growth of the 
Universities, and the extended range of studies, created a 
demand for more teaching, and the absentee Prize Fellow 
was not there to give it. Hence came two movements — 
the first to cut down the length of tenure, and the second 
to attach definite College work to the office, thus getting 
rid altogether of the pure Prize Fellowship. As for the 
first movement, 2 the latest suggestion is that the tenure 
should undergo yet another shortening, and "that in 
general a Fellow should in the first instance be elected 
for a term of three years, and should be eligible for 
re-election for a further term of three years." But with 
every reduction in the number of years, Prize Fellowships 

1 Report, p. 156. 2 Reform Committee's Report, p. 15. 



334 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

become less valuable, or, in other words, less attractive^ 
and to regard them as the chief driving force of the 
University is no longer possible, nor in fact are they so 
regarded. Some other means must be found of keeping 
alive the spirit of emulation. 

As for the second movement, the Quarterly Reviewer 1 
says that in 1904 there were at Cambridge about 315 
ordinary Fellows. Of these, " some 245 were Resident, and 
some 70 Non-resident. Of the Residents, about 225 were 
holding some University or College office, educational 
or administrative. Of the Non-residents, and of the 
Residents who were holding no office, the greater number 
had earned their Fellowships by holding some qualifying 
position, such as a Lectureship, for a given number of 
years, usually 20. Among the Non-residents, in addition 
to Fellows who hold their Fellowships as a pension, were 
to be found students prosecuting Research away from 
Cambridge ; such students are, as a rule, liable to be 
summoned to reside, as College exigencies may demand. 
Several other Non-residents are Fellows who have but 
recently received appointments away from Cambridge ; 
their Fellowships will, under the new Statutes, lapse in a 
year or two. The analysis shows that the number of 
' Prize Fellowships ' is small, and it is believed that they 
are steadily diminishing." 

The Reform Committee' 2 confirm this view. They 
say : " The introduction and development of teaching in 
old and new subjects has rapidly increased the demand 
for Fellowships for the support of new teaching and 
for the encouragement of Research. In consequence, the 
number of Fellowships held irrespective of conditions of 
service or Research, has been largely diminished. Some 
Colleges have, in practice, abolished Prize Fellowships 
by making it a rule to attach conditions to the tenure 
of Fellowships. The Committee think it very important 
that this principle should be generally adopted." Exit 
the Prize Fellow. 

The reader will gather from these extracts that 
Fellowships are given in four ways : (1) as Prizes ; (2) 
as part payment for teaching or other College work ; 

l p. 512. 2 p . 15. 



SUGGESTIONS. j 335 

(3) as Pensions; (4) for Research. Let us examine these 
one by one. 

1. It may be taken for granted that Prize Fellow- 
ships are doomed. They are bad for the Colleges because 
they absorb a portion of its revenues without yielding 
any return in the shape of work done. For the men who 
receive them they are at once too large and too small. A 
Fellowship of £200 a year for six or seven years is 
obviously excessive, and out of all proportion, as a mere 
prize. On the other hand, it is too small in amount, and 
too short in point of time, to constitute a career. Yet it 
not unfrequently deceives the recipient in these respects. 
Seven years seems a long way ahead to a young man, and 
£200 a year, with nothing to do for it, a comparatively large 
income. The result is that no inconsiderable number of 
Prize Fellows drift along for some of the most important 
years of life, then their Fellowships run out, and they find 
they have been handicapped rather than helped as far as 
a career goes. Actual experience thus weakens the force of 
the once popular argument in favour of the Prize Fellow- 
ship, — that it helps a man to a career by bridging over an 
inevitable waiting time. It has been shown that it may 
have the reverse effect. Again, it is not the duty of the 
Colleges to help men to a career. Their primary duty, as 
the component parts of the University, is to teach ; and 
until they not only teach well, but pay their teachers 
adequately, they ought not to give Fellowships on so 
vague a ground as helping a man to a career. Fellowships, 
in fact, never are given for this reason. They are given 
for a high place in the Tripos ; that they help a man to a 
position outside the University is an accident. 

If, however, it is felt that there is still some force left 
in the old argument, and that it is good that men should 
be helped after they have finished their course of study, 
let the thing be done systematically and according to 
clearly denned principles. The University should be 
the responsible body, and the Career Scholarship, as it 
might be called, should last only so long as it is actually 
needed, and should be moderate in amount. 

There are two special cases in which such Career 
Scholarships might be given with advantage to the com- 
munity, and these are the Scholastic Profession and 



336 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Medicine. It is futile to preach the necessity of training 
for the teaching profession to those who have already 
difficulty in meeting the expenses of the normal three 
years' course. If a fourth year is to be added, the extra 
cost should be provided. Then, again, a medical course is 
long and expensive; and it is of the highest importance to 
the State, especially in view of recent legislation, that 
there should be a full supply of properly qualified doctors. 
These Scholarships could be given by the University on 
the result of its own examinations. They are, however, a 
counsel of perfection, as there are many more pressing 
claims. 

2. Fellowships as part payment for College work. 
Fellowships, as has been already seen, are now mostly 

attached to other College offices. A man serves as 
Lecturer, Tutor, Bursar, Steward, &c. ; and the pay of 
these posts being generally insufficient to live on, a 
Fellowship is attached to them so that the holder of the 
two offices may eke out a subsistence. This is a strange 
plan, if it is critically examined. Good work is badly paid ; 
and to make the balance even, a further payment is made 
for doing nothing at all. Sweated labour is compensated 
by a sinecure. Two ills are supposed to make one good. 
Surely the common-sense plan of the world outside is 
better — to pay well for work done, and to pay nothing 
except for work done. 

3. Fellowships as pensions. 

As stated above, if a Fellow has served his College 
faithfully for a number of years, he is allowed to retire 
from work and retain his Fellowship. A Fellowship thus 
becomes a pension, but in an unscientific and unbusiness- 
like shape. A pension ought to be graded in amount 
according to length of service and previous salary ; and it 
ought to be paid as a pension, and not as something else. 
Pension schemes, both for the University and the Colleges, 
are of the greatest importance, but they must be set up 
and administered on business lines. The mere continuing 
of a Fellowship does not fulfil the proper conditions. 

4. Fellowships for Research. 

The whole question of Research is one of great diffi- 
culty and complexity, and more will be said about it later 
on. The University and certain of the Colleges are trying 



SUGGESTIONS. 337 

to promote it, but it is often in such a way as to render 
Research an exceedingly perilous task for those who 
engage in it. A man takes his degree, and on the strength 
of it, or of some particular piece of work he wishes to do, 
his College gives him a Fellowship. He applies himself 
to his task, and at the end of it may be two, three, or, in 
very exceptional cases, ten years, his Fellowship expires 
and he is left without resources. A career as teacher has 
been made more difficult for him, because teaching insti- 
tutions prefer men who have had experience, and he is by 
this time too old for the Civil Service both at home and 
abroad. No one should take a Research Fellowship unless 
he has private means whereon to live when the Fellow- 
ship has run out. The Fellowship system can therefore 
hardly be called ideal for the promotion of Research. 

The Oxford plan, of a separate and additional exam- 
ination for a Fellowship, demands a brief mention. Mark 
Pattison says of it ' : " The candidates are practically 
quite young men of from twenty-one to twenty-five, who 
are fresh from the Schools, and have not yet entered upon 
the study of any ' branch of knowledge.' It is a disadvan- 
tage to a candidate to have devoted any time to special 
knowledge. . . For the competition is not an examin- 
ation in acquirement, but turns mainly on the performance 
of exercises. Electors generally prefer the younger 
competitors, or rather the examination is so arranged 
that the younger man has the best chance in it. Colleges 
contrive to fix their times of election so as to catch the 
men who are just out of the Schools, as giving them a 
better field to select from. As are the candidates, such 
are the awarders of the prize. The whole body of Fellows 
are electors, who, if not mainly young men, are, as we 
have seen, men who, as Fellows, have given no guarantee 
of excellence in any ' branch of knowledge.' They 
naturally examine in what they know ; and the conduct 
of the examination usually falls into the hands of the 
youngest on the list, as himself most fresh from the 
performance of the exercises of which the competition 
chiefly consists. A Fellowship examination is thus a 
mere repetition of the examinations in the Public Schools, 

1 Suggestions, pp. 95, 96. 



338 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

by a less competent Board of Examiners. It is entirely 
meaningless. . . The Fellowships, as now administered, 
are to the academical course what the Scholarships are 
to the grammar school — so much prize-money offered for 
competition among the scholars." 

Report says that Oxford, following in the wake of 
Cambridge, is now gradually abandoning this system, and 
more and more giving Fellowships for excellent per- 
formances in the University examinations. This is 
satisfactory as far as it goes, as saving an additional and 
useless test. Consider, however, the position of the yet 
remaining victims, and of their partners in suffering at 
those Cambridge Colleges which still give Fellowships 
by examination or dissertation. The undergraduate 
enters the University at nineteen as a rule. If he is 
ambitious of a Fellowship he will probably take a four- 
year-course, at the end of which he is twenty-three. If 
he is not elected to a Fellowship till his third and last 
chance, he continues a mere examinee, untrained for 
any special pursuit till he is twenty-six, or more than 
one-third of the allotted span of human life. If he 
fails after all to get a Fellowship, his position is piti- 
able indeed. 

Where a Fellowship is not given on examination, it is 
awarded by co-optation, the existing Fellows filling up the 
vacancy. The Royal Commissioners of 1850, in their Report 
about Cambridge were loud in their praise of the impartial 
manner in which they found that this delicate duty was 
discharged. They said that "the perfect integrity and 
impartiality with which Fellowships are for the most 
part awarded, is one of the most valuable features of the 
Cambridge system. A student, however friendless and 
unknown, provided he have the requisite qualifications of 
character and ability, is as sure of obtaining his Fellow- 
ship as another of better family or wealthier connexions." 1 
These words are as true now as when they were written, 
but they do not state the whole of the case. The figures 
previously given show how the richer Colleges come into 
the market, and by giving many valuable Scholarships buy 
up the best men. The result is that they have not 

i lieport, p. 156. 



SUGGESTIONS. 339 

Fellowships available for all those who take a high place 
in a Tripos. On the other hand, the smaller and poorer 
Colleges may have more Fellowships than they have good 
men to fill them. They very often fill up vacancies by 
electing those whom the larger foundations have no room 
for, but a College always prefers a man of its own if 
there is one at all suitable. The result is that men 
from a small College who have taken a lower degree get 
Fellowships, while men from a larger College who have 
taken a higher degree are left out. This is a serious draw- 
back to the Fellowship system as at present worked. 
There is another consideration generally present to the 
minds of the electing body which the Commissioners did 
not mention. The members of a College staff see much 
of one another, they work together, dine together, live 
together in the same building. Personal qualifications 
must therefore be taken into account in the choice of a 
colleague, or friction may result. It is obviously of great 
importance that the new Fellow should be someone with 
whom the existing Fellows can work and live, and no 
secret is made of this fact at Cambridge. If there is but 
one man available the College does its duty, personal 
qualifications or no personal qualifications ; but if there 
are two or more men in the field, the choice naturally falls 
on the one who will be the most agreeable to live with 
and to work with. This is where the Social Club side of 
a College comes in. 

The various forms of Fellowships have thus been 
tried, and each has been found wanting. The conclusion 
to be drawn is that the final step must be taken, and 
Fellowships abolished, the title of Fellow alone remain- 
ing. The name may be kept because of its historical 
associations, and because it has a commercial value 
in the outside world ; but the emoluments, if not the 
privileges, must go. 

The possibility of making teaching at Cambridge 
a career now becomes manifest. We have already 
assumed that a centralised management of College 
property and domestic business would result in an 
increased income. The Common University Fund 
would automatically benefit thereby. If in addition the 
whole of the Fellowship and Lectureship funds were 



340 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

thrown into one by each of the proposed groups of 
Colleges, the saving effected would admit of a graduated 
scale of payments of increased amounts, with pensions 
on retirement. The scheme might be worked somewhat 
as follows : There would be Junior Lectureships and 
Senior Lectureships. Young men would not be appointed 
to them immediately on taking a degree. They would be 
required to undergo a preliminary training ; or, if that 
were dispensed with, to serve a year on probation. The 
posts would be thrown open to competition, and previous 
experience would count. The candidates would seek such 
experience in the Public Schools or the provincial Univer- 
sities, and look to return to Cambridge when they had 
won a reputation elsewhere. The Sub-Professorships and 
Professorships in the University would supply the next 
stage for legitimate ambition ; and here also a pension 
scheme, with retirement at a proper age, could be put in 
operation. The Universities have such strong natural 
attractions that they might then fairly expect to draw 
to themselves the pick of the teaching profession. The 
principle of emulation would be preserved, though in a 
different form from that which found favour with the 
Commissioners of 1850. 

Bursars and Stewards have now disappeared. Fellow- 
ships as sinecures, as part payments of salaries, and 
as pensions, have also disappeared. The Teachers and 
the Tutors alone survive. Over them it will be 
natural to place the Master. He will no longer be a 
sinecurist, but the active working head of a great 
educational combination, the chief guardian and guide of 
the undergraduates, the chief adviser of studies, taking 
also, if possible, a share in the work of teaching, with a 
sufficient staff under him, and retiring in due time on a 
pension. 

Such is a possible scheme of Federation, on the 
assumption that the University is first and foremost a 
place of teaching. Obviously it is but one of the very 
many schemes which might be devised, for the Federal 
principle is extremely elastic, and may be embodied in a 
great variety of forms. The British Empire contains at 
least three such forms. In South Africa, the constituent 
States, in their desire to form a strong central Govern- 



SUGGESTIONS. 341 

ment, have divested themselves of their powers to such 
an extent that they remain little more than County 
Councils. In Australia, the opposite policy has prevailed ; 
and the States, in a spirit of jealous independence, have 
conceded the bare minimum, without which a central 
authority would be impossible. Canada has striven, not 
without success, to hold the balance even between the two 
extremes. What may be called the South African policy 
could be applied to our old Universities. The whole 
property, both of University and Colleges, might be 
managed in common, and the income applied as the 
central authority thought fit. The University would 
then appoint all the teachers, prescribe all the courses of 
study, and in a word centralise the whole work and 
management. The Colleges would then sink to the level 
of Hostels, having indeed a corporate life of their own — for 
nothing could deprive them of that — the inmates still 
living together, working together, and taking recreation 
together ; but all else would be gone. 

The above scheme has been framed on quite different 
lines, the object being to preserve to the Colleges as much 
of their independence and separate life as is consistent 
with an efficient and economically managed University. 
It could be brought into operation gradually. Offices 
which had been rendered superfluous would not be filled 
up when they fell vacant, though it would be a great 
advantage if the State would grant a substantial sum 
whereby those persons who did riot fall into the new state 
of things could be pensioned off, and so the full working 
of the scheme be accelerated. Six powerful institutions 
would emerge, strong in numbers, and with ample 
resources, which could compete with one another on fair 
terms. Such a prospect ought not to be without attrac- 
tion, especially to the smaller Colleges. Life would surely 
be much more worth living under the new conditions 
than under the old. But that is not the main argument 
in their favour. The question is one of education, and of 
service to the whole nation. The Colleges are educational 
institutions, and their emotions ought to respond to an 
educational appeal, if it is rightly made. Why should 
not they themselves take the lead? To compare small 
things with great — they are now in the position of the 



342 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

American States in 1782. What an inestimable advantage 
it would be if they would come together and frame a 
constitution for the University. Is there no Alexander 
Hamilton, one knowing both the Colleges and the 
University from the inside, who will come forward and 
show the way? 1 

Section II. University Organisation. 
We have thus far considered suggestions whereby the 
University of Cambridge can be made an organic whole. 
It will further require a Constitution adapted to its new 
condition. Let us then take in succession the five parts 
of the existing order of things : — (1) the Chancellor ; (2) the 
Vice-Chancellor ; (3) the Council of the Senate ; (4) the 
Electoral Roll ; and (5) the Senate. 

(1) The Chancellor. 
The Chancellor is the King of the University, 
dwelling apart and remote, the interpreter of the 
Statutes, and the arbiter in cases of grave dispute. 
His powers in this latter capacity will have to be 
extended. If any difference arises between the Univer- 
sity and the Colleges on a point of finance or of teaching, 
or between the various Boards, he will have to decide it. 

(2) The Vice-Chancellor. 
The Vice-Chancellor is the visible representative of 
the Chancellor and the working head of the University, 

i The whole problem of University organisation has had fresh light 
thrown on it by the recently published Report of the Royal Commission 
on London University. There the problem is also one of Federalism and 
is recognised by the Commissioners as such. Here are some of the con- 
clusions to which they have come : — 

" We agree that the power to control teaching is of more importance 
than the power to test it by granting degrees." 

"The power of the purse is indeed the most important means of 
control which the University should possess if it is to organise the 
teaching with Which it is concerned." 

" Experience has shown that the University cannot be certain of 
securing suitable conditions for the teachers when they are paid for by 
bodies over which they have no financial control. The first necessity is 
therefore that the University should provide its own teaching, by which 
we mean that it should appoint, pay, pension and dismiss its teachers, 
and not leave these primary duties in the hands of independent corpora- 
tions." 

" Economical administration of limited funds is inconsistent with 
financial rivalry between independent institutions." {Report, pp. 17, 46, 
48.) 



SUGGESTIONS. 343 

elected from the Heads of the Colleges. He serves for 
two years ; that is to say, just as he is beginning to 
know his work he leaves it. If the suggestions made 
above as to the grouping of the Colleges are carried out, 
there will be but six persons available, and a longer term 
of office will thus become a necessity. It may be assumed, 
however, in that case that matters will have to be carried 
further and the University given a permanent Head like 
the Principal of a Scottish University. There must be a 
central driving force to keep the whole machinery in 
motion. To this end a free choice must be given to the 
general Governing Body of the University, whatever that 
body shall hereafter be determined to be. The Vice- 
Chancellor should be paid an adequate salary and have an 
official residence with a proper staff under him. So great 
would be the number of his duties that it would be 
advisable to give him a Deputy, also with an adequate 
salary. The Vice-Chancellor and the Deputy Vice- 
Chancellor should be (as the Vice-Chancellor is now) 
ex officio members of the Council and of all Boards and 
Syndicates, but each Board and Syndicate should elect 
its own Chairman, who would be responsible for the work 
of the Board or Syndicate and preside over its delibera- 
tions. The Vice-Chancellor (and his Deputy) could thus 
keep himself in touch with all the most important parts 
of University work, instead of being overwhelmed with 
business as lie now is through being the Chairman on all 
occasions. Both he and his Deputy should retire, say, 
at sixty-five, special powers being given to prolong their 
tenure of office till seventy, and adequate pensions should 
be granted them. 

(3) The Council of the Senate. 

The Council of the Senate is the Cabinet. It consists 
of the Chancellor (who never attends), the Vice-Chan- 
cellor, and sixteen other members chosen according to 
" orders " — i.e. four Heads of Houses, four Professors, and 
eight ordinary members of the Senate. 

The Council recently proposed the following scheme 
for its own reform, 1 but withdrew it without taking a 

1 University Reporter, March 1, 1910, p. G81. 



344 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

vote on it 1 : — "That the Council of the Senate shall 
consist (in addition to the Chancellor) of 
(i.) The Vice-Chancellor; 
(ii.) The Vice-Chancellor-elect (from the date of 

his election) ; 
(iii.) Sixteen members, provided that not more than i 
three of the sixteen are members of the same i 
College, always subject to the restriction that, 
if a member of any College becomes a t 
member of any other College, he shall (for the 
purpose of election into the Council) be 
regarded as belonging only to the College 
which he has last joined." 
The three Orders were thus to be abolished, and 
freedom of choice given. 

At the time of writing, a similar reform is on the way 
to be carried at Oxford. On May 6th 2 of this year (1913) 
Congregation passed a series of resolutions dealing with 
the composition of the Hebdomadal Council. Resolutions 
were carried without a division that the number of 
elected members should continue to be eighteen, and that 
their existing distribution between six Heads of Houses, 
six Professors or Readers, and six members of Convo- 
cation should be discontinued. A resolution to retain 
three seats for Heads of Houses and six for Professors was 
negatived by 60 votes to 53, and a resolution retaining six 
seats for Professors, while abolishing the special repre- 
sentation of Heads of Houses, was lost by 59 votes to 52. 
Finally, a resolution that the whole eighteen seats should 
be open to all members of Convocation of five years' 
standing was carried by 63 votes to 45. It was unani- 
mously agreed that non-attendance should be substituted 
for non-residence as a cause of vacating a seat on the 
Council. If Convocation agrees to the resolutions passed 
by Congregation, Oxford will have taken a stride ahead 
of Cambridge. 

But neither the Cambridge nor the Oxford scheme 
would quite fit in with the changes sketched above. The 
Vice-Chancellor and the Deputy Vice-Chancellor would be 

i lb. October 17, 1910, p. 109. 
2 See Times, May 7th, 1913. 



SUGGESTIONS. 345 

ex officio members of the Council (but not the Chancellor). 
There are two Boards of special importance already in 
existence, the General Board of Studies and the Financial 
Board. A third has been found necessary for our 
reformed University, a Board of Management and Works. 
Later on two more Boards will be put forward as 
desirable, a Board of Examinations and a Board of 
Post-graduate Studies and Research. If these Boards 
elect their own Chairmen, there will be five officials, 
corresponding to the heads of Government departments. 
They must be ex officio members of the Council, or, so to 
speak, Cabinet Ministers. The total number of ex officio 
members will thus be seven, leaving eleven places to be 
filled by the general Governing Body. This it must be 
able to do without any restriction of choice. 

(4) The Electoral Roll. 

The Electoral Roll is the House of Commons. It 
consists mainly of all Masters of Arts or persons of an 
equivalent or higher degree who live within a mile and a 
half of Great St. Mary's Church. Of these there are not 
far short of 700. This is the working legislative body of 
the University. The reconstruction of it, suggested by 
the Reform Committee, was as follows: 1 — 

" (1) That Congregation (the new name for it, 
borrowed from Oxford) shall consist of members of the 
Senate who belong to any of the following classes : 

(a) The Chancellor, High Steward, Vice-Chancellor 
University Representatives, and University 
Officers, the Professors, Readers, and Univer- 
sity Lecturers. 

(b) The Heads, Resident Fellows, and Resident ex- 
Fellows of Colleges. 

(c) Resident members of the Senate doing such work 

for the University or a College or a Public Hostel 
as may be recognised from time to time by 
Decree of the Senate as qualifying for member- 
ship of Congregation. 

(d) Resident members of the Senate who have been 
members of Congregation for ten years (not 
necessarily consecutive). 

l Report, p. 3. 



84(5 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

" (2) That the University shall have power to deter- 
mine by Decree of the Senate from time to time what 
constitutes residence." 

The Council of the Senate made proposals much on 
the same lines, only with further concessions to vested 
interests. 1 They were rejected. Here again Oxford has 
outstripped Cambridge. 

There is one point which may here be dealt with. If 
the Universities are to be efficient parts of a national 
system of education, they must be kept in touch with the 
other parts of that system and with the national life also. 
This necessity has been used as an argument in defence 
of two things — Prize Fellows, and of the supreme control 
wielded over the Universities by the absentee members of 
the Senate. It has been, and is, argued that the Prize 
Fellows, who take their money, go away and live where 
they like, yet keep the University in touch with the out- 
side world ; and the same contention has been urged on 
behalf of the Non-Resident members of the Senate. What 
fails to be done by either of the above-mentioned devices 
ought to be done in a scientific manner. An example 
may be taken from the recently issued Report of the 
Royal Commission on the University of London. The 
Court which it is there proposed to set up 2 consists very 
largely of persons appointed from outside. Such bodies 
as the Royal College of Physicians, the Royal College of 
Surgeons, the Institute of Civil Engineers, the Council of 
Legal Education, the Royal Institute of British Architects, 
the London Chamber of Commerce, the Royal Agricul- 
tural Society, the Headmasters' Conference, the Incor- 
porated Association of Headmasters, and many others, 
are proposed for representation on it. The same policy 
should be adopted for Cambridge. As the University is 
so intimately connected with teaching, what more natural 
and fitting than that the National Union of Teachers, the 
Headmasters' Conference, and the Incorporated Associa- 
tion of Headmasters, should be in official connexion with 
it '? Further, as the University now gives instruction in 
Agriculture, Engineering, Architecture, Economics, not 

i University Reporter, Oct. 17, 1910, pp. 106-8. 
2 Report, pp. 156-160. 



SUGGESTIONS. 347 

to mention the older Faculties of Law and Medicine, it 
ought to he kept in touch with the outside bodies which 
represent these and other subjects. In this way what has 
hitherto been done, either haphazard or not at all, would 
be done systematically and scientifically. 

If the number of subjects taught at Cambridge 
continues to increase, and the number of students 
increases also, the Electoral Roll with these additions 
from outside might in time become an unwieldly body. 
It might thus be well to limit the size of it from the 
outset, and to lay down a rule that it should consist 
definitely, say, of 500 members, 450 actual residents 
and 50 representatives of other bodies. 

A body of this kind might safely be released from 
the absurd restrictions which now hamper the delibera- 
tions of the Senate. Discussion and voting need no 
longer be separated, 1 and amendments could be proposed 
and carried. The power of initiative might also be given. 
At present only the Council of the Senate can frame 
and present Graces or legislative proposals. A fixed pro- 
portion of members of the Electoral Roll might have the 
same privilege conferred on it, say 25, or 5 per cent. This 
would be a return to the ante- 1856 practice in a form 
suited to modern conditions. If this number of members 
agreed on a proposal, the Council would have to bring 
forward a Grace embodying it, and submit it to the 
general verdict. 

Opportunity may here be taken to cite an instance of 
the anomalous relations which still prevail between the 
University and the Colleges — relations which, as Lord 
Curzon points out, have never been defined. 2 On November 
14th, 1912, the Vice-Chancellor addressed the following- 
letter to each of the Masters of Colleges : — :1 

"My Deae Sik— One of the earliest duties which 
confronted me on entering upon the Vice-Chancellorship 
was the adjudication on claims for admission to the 
Electoral Roll. This duty— difficult enough in itself— is 



i By Chapter III., Sec. 1, of the Statutes it is enacted that "no vote 
shall be taken at the time of discussion." 

2 Principles, p. 103. 
3 Cambridge University Reporter. March 19th, 1912, p. 252. 



348 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

made more difficult to successive Vice-Chancellors by a 
want of uniformity among the various Colleges in their 
interpretation of what is meant by ' residence.' 

" The Act of Parliament (TJie Cambridge University < 
Act 1856) constituting the Electoral Roll (see Statutes, , 
p. 123) requires for admission to the Roll (except in cases 
of ex officio membership) that the candidate shall be a 
Member of the Senate and shall have resided within one 
mile and a half of Great S. Mary's Church for fourteen 
weeks at the least between the first day of the preceding 
Michaelmas Term and the first day of the [then] month 
of October. 

"Now it is clear that the only means the Vice-Chan- 
cellor for the time being has of ascertaining these qualifi- 
cations is through the authorities of the various Colleges; 
and it seems to have been the practice hitherto to accept 
this return without question. But some Colleges are 
stricter in their interpretation of the Act of Parliament 
than others ; and it is very difficult to adjudicate on the 
claims of gentlemen whose names are omitted by their 
College, but who can point to Members of other Colleges 
with similar, or perhaps less satisfactory qualifications, 
whose names have remained for years on the Electoral 
Roll. 

" The meaning of the word ' residence ' in the corre- 
sponding Act for the University of Oxford was decided in 
an action brought before the Court of Queen's Bench 
(7 May, 1872), The Queen v. the Vice- Chancellor and the 
Hebdomadal Council of the University of Oxford, when 
Lord Chief Justice Cockburn said : ' " Resident " must 
be construed strictly, . . it must be actual residence. 
We must construe residence with reference to . the 
obvious meaning of the word. Here residence is the 
essence of the qualification. . . It is an actual, as 
distinguished from a constructive, residence that is 
required by the Act.' 

"It has been held (1897, 2 Irish Reports, 563) that 
' residence ' means primarily the dwelling and home 
where a man is supposed usually to live and sleep ; as 
Lord Blackburn put it, ' a man's residence is where he 
habitually sleeps' (1, O'M. & H., 1858). In the Oxford 
case, the mere sleeping ' from time to time ' was held to 



SUGGESTIONS. 349 

be insufficient. There must, to constitute an actual 
residence, be a usual and habitual sleeping in the place. 

" It seems to me that the Vice-Chancellor for the 
time being is bound by the decision quoted above, and 
that it is his duty to follow it in deciding any cases that 
come before him. 

" May I venture therefore to express the hope that 
College authorities will in future make it their uniform 
practice to adopt the strict interpretation of the word 
' residence ' in the preparation of their returns ? 
"I am, 

" Very faithfully yours, 

" S. A. Donaldson, 

" Vice-Chancellor." 

The extraordinary spectacle is here presented of the 
Colleges determining on their account, and in different 
ways, who shall or shall not be members of a purely 
University body. The Vice-Chancellor " ventures to 
express the hope " that they will for the future all decide 
in the same way, i.e. in the legal way ; but if a College 
disregards this expression of opinion, and goes on doing 
what it has always done, what then'? The Vice-Chancellor 
can continue to express hopes, but he is otherwise power- 
less. Have we not here an example of what the Oxford 
Commissioners of 1850 so gently call "an unconsciousness 
of the claims of the University " ? 

(5) The Senate. 

The Senate is the whole body of voters. It is made 
up of all the Resident and Non-Resident Masters of Arts 
or holders of a superior degree. These number about 
7,000, and have a vote on practically all University matters. 
This the Non-Residents only give on special occasions 
(such as Degrees for Women, Compulsory Greek, or 
Abolitions of Tests for Theological Degrees) ; but there 
they are, vastly outnumbering the Residents, and ready 
at any moment to act as a final Court of Appeal under a 
system of Referendum, voting a simple Yes or No. 

The Reform Committee, to which reference has so 
often been made, and the Council of the Senate after it, 
took up the question of the Senate first of all. They were 



350 UNIVEKSITY KEFORM. 

confronted with two difficulties: (1) That the existing 
M.A.'s are not fully representative of those who have 
taken a degree, owing to the fact that a very large number 
of B.A.'s do not proceed to their M.A. 1 ; (2) that the Non- 
Residents are out of touch with University work and 
thought, and thus are not competent to legislate for it. 
As for (2), the Committee suggested 2 that the Residents 
should be erected into a Legislative Assembly, and that 
practically all business should come before it in the first 
instance, but in every case an appeal was to " lie to the 
Senate as a whole, provided that a sufficient number of 
the opponents of the proposal submitted were prepared to 
take the necessary steps." The Committee gave up the 
attempt to assign separate functions to their reconsti- 
tuted Electoral Roll, and the Senate. The Council of the 
Senate proposed to legislate on similar lines, but, as has 
already been told, the Non-Residents came up and carried 
the day against it. 

The common-sense outsider would probably give up 
at once the idea of making some 7000 persons scattered all 
over the habitable world the deciding body in the delicate 
and complicated work of University education. He would 
instinctively look to the men on the spot, to those 
engaged in actual teaching or administration either in 
the University or the Colleges, to direct what they, and 
they alone, can be fully acquainted with. My own 
personal conviction is that nothing can be made of the 
Senate as a governing body. It will always remain an 
obstruction to progress, however ingeniously its activities 
may be limited. Lord Curzon favours the suspensory 
veto. He says : s " It might, for instance, be enacted that 
if a Statute were passed by Congregation by a certain 
majority for two successive years, it should become law 
unless it were thrown out by Convocation by an 
equivalent or some other majority. Or it might be laid 
down that if a measure passed Congregation by a certain 
majority, it could only be rejected by a certain majority 
of those voting in Convocation. Many variations of this 
form of limited prerogative will suggest themselves. 

i In 1909 over 800 men took the B.A., and about 320 the M.A. 
2 Report, p. 2. 3 Principles and Methods, p. 40. 



SUGGESTIONS. 351 

These ideas of reform seem to follow the line of least 
resistance." Let those who favour such schemes frame 
them. My own preference is for self-government. The 
argument for self-government is strengthened by the 
particular form of the Electoral Roll proposed above. 
The 50 representatives of outside bodies, who presumably 
would be men of eminence in their own departments, 
would never consent to see the decisions they had helped 
to make, overridden by a body of more or less ignorant 
outsiders. 

The adoption of a reformed Electoral Roll as the 
governing body of the University would have the further 
advantage of settling the Women's Degrees difficulty. 
Why women who have passed the same examinations as 
the men should not be allowed to write the same letters 
after their names is a thing hard to be understood. The 
reason at the bottom of the opposition is that familiar 
friend, " the thin end of the wedge." It is feared that if 
women were allowed to take the M.A. degree, they might 
go on to claim membership of the Senate, and a share in the 
government of the University. But if the mere taking 
the M.A. no longer made a man a member of the 
governing body of the University, this fear would vanish, 
and a particularly odious incapacity be abolished by 
general consent. 

Section III. Adjustment of the University to National 

Education. 

The third branch of University Reform is to bring 
the reorganised University into touch and true relations 
with the rest of our system of National Education. 1 
Some may argue that effort in this direction is super- 
fluous, that our ancient Universities are adapting 
themselves to modern conditions, and they may point 
for proof to the increase in the number of students, the 
multiplication of subjects of study, and the corresponding 



i The question of the relation of Universities and University Colleges 
to Secondary Education is discussed in the Report of the Royal Com- 
mission on Secondary Education 1895, pp. 218-255. Points of special 
interest are: Effect of the Entrance Scholarships, pp. 221-224; Poverty 
qualification and Local Authorities, p. 226 ; Reduction in value of 
Scholarships, p. 226 ; Proper age for Matriculation, pp. 230-232 ; Uni- 
versity Extension and Secondary Education, pp. 249-254. 



352 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

growth of the teaching staff. These contentions deserve 
investigation. 

Let us take the number of students first. The 
modern history of Cambridge University begins at 1850, 
the date of the first Royal Commission. During the 30 I 
years, 1850 to 1880, the numbers of Freshmen were 
exactly doubled, rising from 400 to 800 per annum. 1 In 
1882 the new Statutes came into force, both for the 
University and the Colleges, as the result of the Act of 
1877. The upward movement continued at Cambridge, 
and in 1887 the matriculations for the first time exceeded 
a thousand, the exact number being 1,012. It was three 
years before the thousand was again reached, the 
matriculations for 1890 being 1,027. Then another drop 
took place, and 16 years elapsed before there was another 
four-figure entry. The numbers for recent years are : — 



Year. 


Matriculations 


1906 


1,067 


1907 


1,083 


1908 


1,164 


1909 


1,163 


191U 


1,218 


1911 


1,191 


1912 


1,156 



These figures represent a growth with many fluctuations. 
Here are two striking facts. Both Oxford and Cambridge 
were in the first quarter of the Seventeenth Century as 
large as they were till 1850, that is, for 225 years ; and, 
secondly, if there were now the same proportion to popu- 
lation of students entering as there was in 1600-1625, 
Oxford and Cambridge would be receiving annually 5,000 
freshmen. The proportion in 1630 was one in every 3,600 
of the male population of England and Wales ; at the 
present day it is one in 9.000. 2 This cannot be regarded 
as an exhilarating result. The slow rate of progress 
points to something wrong somewhere. 

It is not that Cambridge has gone back to the 
slumbers of the eighteenth century. On the contrary, it 
has made persistent and courageous efforts to adapt itself 
to modern conditions. The last fifty years, and especially 
the last twenty-five years, show a great increase in the 
number of subjects taught, and of people to teach them. 

i Venn, Matriculations, p. 17. 2 lb. p. 12. 



SUGGESTIONS. 353 

Originally there was but one Tripos at Cambridge— 
the Mathematical. 

In 1815, came the Civil Law Classes — now the Law 
Tripos ; in 1824, the Classical Tripos. Then there was a 
long pause. The first burst of activity was from 1851 to 
1856, during which time the Moral Sciences Tripos, the 
Natural Sciences Tripos, and the Theological Tripos were 
founded. Then came another pause of nearly twenty 
years, after which the modern period fairly set in. 

In 1875, the Historical Tripos was founded; in 1878, 
the Semitic Languages Tripos ; in 1879, the Indian Lan- 
guages Tripos ; in 1886, the Mediaeval and Modern Lan- 
guages Tripos ; in 1894, the Mechanical Sciences Tripos ; 
in 1895, the Oriental Languages Tripos (which took the 
places of the Semitic Languages and the Indian Languages 
Triposes) ; and in 1905, the Economics Tripos. This year 
(1913) an Anthropological Tripos has been agreed to. 

Since 1875 the number of Triposes has grown from 
six to twelve, or exactly twice as many. To put the facts 
in another way— a student can now take Honours in 
Mathematics, Classics, Law, Natural Science, Moral 
Science, Theology, History, Oriental Languages (includ- 
ing Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, Sanskrit, Persian, and 
Chinese), in Mediaeval and Modern Languages (including 
English, Icelandic, Gothic, French, Italian, Spanish, 
Portuguese, German, and Russian), in Engineering, 
Economics, and Anthropology. Degrees can be taken in 
Medicine and Music, and Diplomas are given for Agricul- 
ture, Anthropology, Architecture, Forestry, Geography, 
Mining Engineering, Psychological Medicine, Sanitary 
Science, and Tropical Medicine. Men can be trained 
practically as physicians and surgeons at Addenbrooke's 
Hospital, as engineers in the Mechanical Laboratory, 
as farmers at the Experimental Farm on Madingley Road, 
as teachers at the Day Training College, and for the 
Army in the Officers' Training Corps. They can also be 
specially prepared for the Indian Civil Service and the 
Foreign Service. Finally, they can be admitted as 
Advanced Students in various branches of learning ; that 
is to say, members of other Universities, or, in special 
cases, persons who are not members of a University at 
all, may enter as advanced students and obtain a degree. 



354 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

There has been a corresponding increase in the 
number of teachers. Since 1870, fourteen additional Pro- 
fessorships have been founded. There are now fifty-one 
Professors, fourteen Readers, sixty-four University Lec- 
turers, eighteen University Teachers, and thirty-five 
Demonstrators. In 1870 there was one Demonstrator and 
one Teacher. The above list, which does not include the 
Lecturers in Military Science, Mining Engineering, or 
Forestry, makes a total of 182 teachers of one grade or 
another. The College Lecturers number some 200, so 
that the teaching staff of the University and Colleges 
combined numbers about 380, or about one teacher for 
every ten undergraduates. Cambridge strives to teach all 
that a complicated modern society can demand to know. 
The cause of its stagnation in numbers is not its failure 
to provide the best and most varied instruction. 

Multiplication of Buildings. 

Nor does the cause lie in the refusal to spend money 
on buildings and equipment. This point was well put by 
Mr. Dickson of Peterhouse, in the last debate on Com- 
pulsory Greek at Cambridge. " Since 1882," he said, 
" they had spent on an average ±'15,000 a year to make 
themselves more efficient — or in the last 15 years £225,000. 
They had recently also spent ±100,000 on new buildings — 
say ±300,000 altogether in 15 years — and they had no 
increase to show in the number of their students. Why 
was this ? " 

There is no mystery about the obstacle in the way of the 
expansion of Cambridge — it is the heavy cost of a University 
education. Mark Pattison put the matter in a nutshell 
when he wrote : " Let Oxford become the first school of 
science and learning in the world, and at the same time 
let it be accessible at the cost only of board and lodging, 
and it will attract pupils enough." ' On this point issue 
must be joined with the Reform Committee, who in their 
Report say : " The Committee are of opinion that, with 
the large sums given to students, a Cambridge education 
is accessible to any student, however poor, who has given 
evidence of ability." 2 They arrive at this conclusion in 
the following way : — 

i Suggestions, p. 81. 2 Report, p. 16. 



SUGGESTIONS. 355 

" The Committee have given some consideration to 
the question of University and College fees, and to the 
necessary expense incurred by the student at Cambridge. 

" The fees paid to the University by each under- 
graduate (who takes his degree in the normal course in nine 
terms), for Matriculation, Capitation Tax, Examination 
and Degree fees, amount in all to about £25, spread over 
the three years. The Colleges are also taxed by the 
University on the payments made to them by their 
members, 1 so that indirectly a somewhat larger sum is 
received by the University from undergraduates. 

" Apart from College fees for admission and degrees, 
the fixed payments made to the Colleges for tuition and 
establishment charges range from £30 to £40 per annum 
for each student. Other expenses vary with the habits 
and requirements of each student. 

" The Committee, after investigating the subject, are 
of opinion that the expenses of a careful student need not 
exceed £120 for the Academic year. This does not 
include the student's expenses during the vacations, nor 
his clothes, nor travelling expenses. Students studying 
Medicine or Natural Science incur special expenses for 
laboratory fees which increase the cost on the average by 
about £20 a year. The expense to a student of Engineer- 
ing is somewhat greater. If a student resides during 
the usual portion of the Long Vacation he incurs an 
additional expense of £12 to £25, according to the amount 
of instruction required. 

" The Committee are informed that a sum of £80 or 
£90 will enable a Non-Collegiate student to meet his 
Cambridge expenses for the Academic year. 

" In view of the increasing demands made on both 
the University and the Colleges, the Committee cannot 
anticipate any diminution in the fixed charges made to 
students by the University and the Colleges. As regards 
the variable expenses of undergraduates, the Committee 
are of opinion that the principle of fixed inclusive charges, 
already adopted at some Colleges, whether in connection 
with the hostel system or not, affords an effective means 
by which the expenditure of the student can be regulated 
and reduced. 

l i.e. on half the tuition tees. 



356 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

" The Committee, hpwever, believe that, as stated 
above, and with the exceptions specified, a careful student 
attached to a College may cover his Cambridge expenses 
for £120 a year, and that a Non-Collegiate student may 
cover his expenses for £80 or £90 a year. In both cases 
these amounts may with great economy be diminished 
still further. 

" In the consideration of expense the amount of help 
given by the Colleges to the students should be borne in 
mind. College Scholarships and Exhibitions amount to 
over £35,000 a year. Much additional help is given to 
students who stand in special need of further assistance, 
whether scholars or not." 

Some further examination of these figures is necessary 
before their full force is realised. The £120, which a 
careful student is supposed to find sufficient, does not 
include " expenses during the vacations, nor his clothes, 
nor travelling expenses." Men are " up " about eight 
weeks each term, or 24 weeks in the year. There are 
therefore 28 other weeks during which they have to be 
maintained. Reckoning the cost of this at the moderate 
sum of 10s. a week, a further £14 must be added to the 
£120. Clothes will cost at least £20 a year ; and if the 
student resides at an average distance of 120 miles from 
Cambridge, six journeys to and fro will cost £3. Most 
men like to play games, and in many Colleges there is 
a lump sum per term which covers all the Clubs. In 
a College bill which lies before me, College Clubs are 
£1 15s. per term, or £5 5s. Od. a year. There is no 
compulsion to pay this subscription, but it will be readily 
understood that it makes a difference to a man's position 
whether he does so or not. Is this, or a similar item, 
included in the £120, and is any allowance made for 
books and pocket money ? Assuming that everything 
has been reckoned in, the £120 has still grown to £157, 
without counting Long Vacation expenses. To this, 
£20 must be added in the case of Natural Science 
students ; and £25, say, for Engineering students. The 
£157 rises in these cases to £177 and £182, and it is the 
students from the more recently founded Secondary 
Schools who take these subjects — a poorer class as con- 
trasted with those who come from the great Public 



SUGGESTIONS. 357 

Schools. If a Long Vacation is added, with from £12 to 
£25 extra, the figures mount again to £189 and £207. 

There is another point to be considered. The heaviest 
financial burden comes on the parent at the beginning of 
his son's University career. Let us suppose the son in 
question takes the Previous Examination in October 
immediately before entering. There will then be : — 
Previous Examination Fee, £3 10s. 0d.; Matriculation 
Fee, £5 0s. 0d.; Caution Money to College, £15 0s. 0d.; 
Entrance Fee to College (varying), say, £2 10s. Od. ; or 
£25 10s. Od. in all. If the student takes rooms in College 
there will be furniture to be paid for, (unless the rooms 
are let furnished at a higher rent), and £25 will be a 
moderate sum wherewith to furnish and equip a sitting- 
room, a bed-room, and a gyp-room. Here then is an 
initial expenditure of £50 down, with at least £150, and it 
may be £200, for three years more. This is a long way 
from the Mark Pattison ideal of a University accessible 
at the cost of board and lodging only. 

Of course there is, on the other side, the plea of the 
special help given by the Colleges, amounting to the very 
large sum of £35,000 a year. Cambridge University is an 
expensive place of education, with its costliness tempered 
by a system of Scholarships and Exhibitions. The next 
step is to examine this system. We must begin by 
distinguishing between Scholarships and Exhibitions : 
the former being prizes given for ability in examinations ; 
the latter, strictly speaking, being bestowed as charitable 
gifts to help poverty. 

The Scholarship system can best be tested by giving 
the actual awards. Taking the current academical year 
1912-1913, in four of the smaller Colleges the results are 
not accessible to the public ; of the thirteen remaining 
Colleges, three give only the subjects for which the 
awards are made, and the remainder give both the 
subjects and the amounts. The results given are accord- 
ingly only approximate. They are as follows : — 

Number of Scholarships awarded. 

Modern 
Mathe- Engi- Lan- 

Classics. matics. Science. History, neering. guages. Hebrew. Total. 
60i 37 £ 40£ 2H 1 5 1 167 



358 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

(Where a Scholarship is given for two subjects, half is 
counted to each.) 

The money values, so far as they are given, are : 

Modern 
Mathe- Engi- Lan- 

Classics. matics. Science. History, neering. guages. Hebrew. Total. 
£ £ £ £'£ £ £ £ 

2,410 1,935 1,955 740 80 140 40 7,300 

At Cambridge, as at Oxford, 1 Classics head the list. 
Its predominance would be increased if the money values 
for King's were available. The four Entrance Scholar- 
ships appropriated at that College to Eton and the Open 
Entrance Scholarships are mainly given in this subject- 
Cambridge does far more for Mathematics and Science 
than Oxford. History too is better helped ; as at Oxford 
less than one-fifth of the number of Scholarships are 
given for it, as compared with the number given for 
Classics, while the proportion at Cambridge is just over 
a third. Cambridge has thus shown itself much more 
open to modern influences than Oxford, especially with 
regard to Science. The predominance of Science over both 
Classics and Mathematics in the number of its students 
is the great feature of modern Cambridge. For all that, 
Classics remain the chief bounty-fed subject. The great 
Public Schools carry off the lion's share of the spoils in the 
shape of Scholarships. These Schools are the recognised 
highways to the Universities ; and by adding Science to 
the two older subjects they have contrived to maintain 
their ancient superiority. The candidates who are the best 
prepared have the best chance. The rich foundations 
win the prizes because of the splendid tuition which they 
can give. The result is that many of the Scholarships 
are won by men who do not need them. What propor- 
tion these bear to the whole number it is impossible to 
say, but most people will put it higher than Lord Curzon 
does. He has his own special standard of poverty, and in 
proportion as that standard is lowered we shall approxi- 
mate to Bishoj) Gore's statement, that two out of five, or 
40 per cent, of the scholars of Oxford, do not need the 
emoluments they receive. 2 

1 See Lord Curzon's table at p. 77 of his book. 
2 Principles and Methods, pp. 82, 83. 



SUGGESTIONS. 359 

Exhibitions raise the difficult question of helping 
poverty. To inquire into a man's means is always an 
invidious task, and the Colleges are ill-fitted to perform 
it. If it is to be done at all, it had better be done locally. 
And here surely there might be more co-operation between 
the Universities and the County Councils and the 
County Borough Councils acting as the local education 
authorities. Most of these bodies have Scholarship 
schemes which include the helping of poor students to 
take a University course. They have special facilities for 
finding out the real financial position of parents and 
guardians. 

Scholarships and Exhibitions then are mere pallia- 
tives ; they do not go to the root of the matter, and the 
problem of the expensiveness of a University career still 
faces the reformer as it did in 1854, and 1856, and again in 
1877. In the Acts of 1854 and 1856 the great idea was to 
provide Halls or Hostels for poor men. The Halls never 
got started in any appreciable number. Where they exist 
to-day they are not popular, and men escape from them as 
soon as they can. A Hostel saves expense by having more 
meals in common and by other boarding school arrange- 
ments. The men envy the greater freedom of rooms or 
lodgings, and are apt to think they are looked down upon 
by the other undergraduates as socially inferior. After 
the Hostels came the Non-Collegiate or Unattached Stu- 
dent scheme. This again is a failure, as far as Cambridge 
is concerned. The tables given above show that the per- 
centage of Honour degrees to Matriculations at Fitzwilliam 
Hall is 7"2, and in Poll degrees 24*0, that is to say, less than 
one-third of all the men who enter the University as Non- 
Collegiate students take a degree as such. This does not 
mean that they are either lazier or more stupid than the 
other men, but that they get into a College as soon as 
they can. The attractions of College life are too much for 
them. It was in vain that the Archbishop of Canterbury 
got his amendment inserted in the Act of 1877 [Clause 
16 (11)] enabling the University Commissioners "to make 
provision for diminishing the expense of University 
education by founding Scholarships tenable by students 
either at any College or Hall within the University, or 
as unattached students, or by paying salaries to the 



360 UNIVEESITY REFORM. 

teachers of such unattached students, or by otherwise 
encouraging such unattached students." This provision 
remained a dead letter. 

Hostels, the Non-Collegiate student system, the 
Exhibition system, including Sizarships, all labour under 
the disadvantage of differentiating between men, and so 
introducing class distinctions. What is wanted is a 
reduction of expense which shall be common to every- 
body. This is matter of the more economical use of 
existing resources, which is again a matter of organisation. 
Three methods of effecting economies have already been 
suggested : (1) The centralised administration of College 
property and business; (2) the abolition of emoluments 
for Fellowships; (3) a centralised system of teaching. 
A fourth method would be to use to greater advantage 
the £35,000 a year, now spent on Scholarships. Let a 
portion of the savings from these four sources be used in 
abolishing all worrying fees and dues, such as Matricu- 
lation fees, Capitation Tax, Entrance fees to College, 
Caution Money and terminal payments to College, and 
above all let the tuition fees both in College and 
University be reduced, or if possible abolished altogether. 
Then an approximation will be made to the democratic 
ideal of board and lodging expenses and nothing beyond. 
Let the Colleges offer Scholarships only, and these of 
reduced amount, and let the Local Authorities come in 
with supplementary grants in aid. These need not be 
known to the Universities at all, and thus no class 
distinctions would be created. If the strain on the Local 
Authorities proved too great, the Government might fairly 
be asked to step in and increase the grant for Secondary 
Education, so that no student fit to come to the 
University should be left outside. 

It will not be possible, nor would it be advisable, to 
do away with Scholarships altogether. Mark Pattison, 
who has been thought a misanthrope, had in this respect a 
touching faith in human nature. He says 1 : " Free intel- 
ligence as such has an elasticity of its own. The mind in 
its spring puts itself forth on all sides. It requires no 
stimulation, but only to be directed. The reason, by its 



i Essays on the Endowment of Research, pp. 17, 18. 



SUGGESTIONS. 361 

own nature, seeks truth. The young mind desires to 
know, to explore the unknown, to find out the nature and 
causes of things. The task of the teacher is easy; it is 
only to satisfy this longing. He has but to guide and 
aid ; he may have to restrain ardour, never to urge 
reluctance. The stimulus to acquisition is within. . . 
This method is wholly voluntary ; it submits to no com- 
pulsion from the State, it employs no artificial allure- 
ments, but depends entirely upon the attraction which 
Science, Letters, and the humanities exert upon the classes 
possessed of wealth and leisure. In opposition to this 
method stands the method of recruitment by bounties." 

The faults of our systems of elementary and second- 
ary education may be the cause why this spontaneous 
desire for knowledge is not more often seen ; but here 
again the reformer must take things as they are. Emula- 
tion is a stimulus to learning, and as such cannot yet be 
dispensed with. The Scholar's distinctive gown and his 
special table in Hall are stimuli of an inexpensive charac- 
ter, and might be generally adopted. Besides these, there 
must be Scholarships, but these should be awarded in 
a far more scientific manner than at present. The 
Scholarship system, as it exists at Cambridge, is open to 
several grave objections. The date of the Examinations 
is too early. On May 16th of this year the great group of 
six Colleges — Pembroke, Caius, Jesus, Christ's, St. John's 
and Emmanuel — offered 56 Entrance Scholarships and 
a large number of Exhibitions to be competed for on 
December 2nd next. The Examinations for Trinity, 
Clare and Trinity Hall will be held on the same date. 
Of old, Entrance Scholarship Examinations used to be 
held in March or April. In the eagerness of the Colleges 
to be first in the field and so carry off the best men, the 
date has been gradually moved forward till it is now at 
the very beginning of December — nearly a year before the 
successful candidates enter the University. Two dis- 
advantages result. Students at this period of their mental 
development often come on very rapidly, and an examina- 
tion of the same candidates held some months later would 
in many cases show different results. Candidates should 
be tested as near the time of their coming up as possible. 
Again, the winner of a Scholarship is tempted to think 



362 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

he has already attained, and, by a natural reaction, to 
rest on his oars. A later date of examination would 
minimise this disadvantage. With groups of Colleges 
and single Colleges holding examinations at different 
times for Scholarships of different values, there must 
inevitably be different standards and different degrees 
of merit. Some who deserve to succeed fail, because they 
go where the competition is excessive, and some succeed, 
who, because the competition is small and the standard 
low, deserve to fail. The University obviously ought to 
step in and hold the examination itself, so that there 
should be one standard for all alike. Candidates would 
be allowed to put down their names for any College or 
group of Colleges in the order in which they preferred 
them, and in the event of success would be assigned to 
the College of their choice so far as was possible. Scholar- 
ships should be of two sorts only, Minor and Major, say 
of i'40 and £60 a year each. Both should be tenable for 
one year only as a period of probation. The University 
should examine again at the end of the year, displacing 
the College "Mays." Then the election would be to a 
Foundation Scholarship for two years, with power to 
the Colleges to prolong it for a third year. Honours men 
taking the first and second parts of a Tripos would thus 
be examined at the end of each year of their course, and 
would thereby be kept up to the mark. The number of 
Scholarships in each subject should not be definitely 
fixed beforehand ; and the examination should be in all the 
subjects which can properly be taught at school, Classics 
Mathematics, the Natural Sciences, History, and Modern 
Languages. Those who come up to standard in any 
one (or more) of these should have scholarships awarded 
them, so far as the funds available permit. There should 
no longer be any specially bounty-fed subject. 

The Colleges ma}' be expected to offer strong opposition 
to these proposals. They are keen to win reputation for 
themselves by distinctions in the Triposes, and Scholar- 
ships are the natural means for achieving this end. 
After what has been said about the principle of 
emulation, it is impossible to condemn the Colleges on 
this count. But there is another road to the same result. 
Let the grouped Colleges vie with one another in giving 



SUGGESTIONS. 3G3 

the best instruction and the best supervision, and they 
will have no cause to complain either of the number or 
the ability of the students they attract. 

A University fails to do its duty as a constituent 
part of a national system of education, if it does not 
make it as easy as possible for all deserving students to 
avail themselves of the advantages it offers; so also it 
fails in its duty if it does not exclude the undeserving. 
At present there are many men kept away from Cam- 
bridge who ought to be here, and many here who would 
be better away. As an all-round reduction in the expense 
of a University course is needed in the case of the one set, 
so a University Entrance Examination is needed in the 
case of the other. The demand for this examina- 
tion is a very old one. As long ago as December 
8th, 1847, a Grace was offered for the appointment 
of a Syndicate to consider the expediency of insti- 
tuting an examination of all students (except those 
of King's College) previous to their residence. It 
was rejected in the Caput. On January 14th, 1849, the 
Rev. J. J. Smith, of Caius College, proposed a Grace to the 
same effect. It was rejected in the Non-Regent House 
the votes being : Placets, 11 ; Non-Placets, 29. 1 Nor has 
the proposal lacked influential support. Whewell, Donald- 
son, Blakesley, Merivale, and Wratislaw were all in favour 
of it, to mention no others. The Oxford Commissioners 
of 1850 expressly recommended it. Archbishop Whately 
held that every other reform would fail if this particular 
one was omitted. Newman, as we have seen, selected the 
absence of a University Entrance Examination as the 
most conspicuous example of the way in which the 
Colleges had set their own interests before those of the 
University. Lord Curzon 2 calls attention to the fact that 
Oxford and Cambridge are the only two Universities in 
the world which have not the right of laying down their 
own terms of admission, and urges all the arguments 
that need be used in favour of giving them this right. The 
resistance still conies from the same quarter. The 
Colleges, as boarding-schools, do not like to be empty 

i Cooper, Annals of Cambridge, Vol. IV., pp. 697, 707. 
2 Principles, p. 103. 



364 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

while their neighbours are full ; and, further, with their 
present system of finance and administration, they require 
all they can get in order to keep going. They are thus 
tempted to admit anybody who can pay his bills, what- 
ever his attainments or want of attainments. An 
Entrance Examination would keep out many who now 
come in; therefore the Colleges will have none of it. Here 
is one explanation of the 21 per cent, of men who enter 
Cambridge and leave it without taking a degree. This 
year a Memorial was presented to the Senate asking for 
the appointment of a Syndicate " to consider the whole 
question of Examinations conducted by the University 
for which preparation nominally takes place at School." 
The Memorial finishes thus : — " We should not suggest 
that the University should interfere with the present 
freedom of the Colleges to admit students who have not 
passed the Previous Examination, as such legislation 
might operate harshly in particular cases." Exactly so. 
Nothing but an Act of Parliament will, I fear, ever give 
Oxford and Cambridge a University Entrance Examina- 
tion. 

The Colleges, for all that, have been taken in the flank 
by the course of events. The obvious necessity of an 
Entrance Examination has led to the Previous Examina- 
tion, or Little-Go, gradually approximating thereto. The 
Previous, it may be explained, is not an examination held 
previous to entrance, but previous to any further examina- 
tion. When it was first instituted 1 it used to be held in 
an undergraduate's fifth term, just half-way through his 
course, which was then eleven terms. The Cambridge 
Commissioners of 1850 noted that the Colleges had up till 
then defeated all attempts to put it earlier. They were in 
dread of the thin end of the wedge. But later attempts 
were more successful. The date was moved forward to 
the Lent Term of the first year; now the Examination 
may be taken before residence. Other Examinations may 
also be substituted for it: as the Senior Local, and the 
Oxford and Cambridge School Examinations. So it has 

i The Grace establishing the Examination was passed on March 
13th, 1822; the first Examination took place in the Lent Term, 1824, 
for undergraduates who had come into residence in October, 1822. 
—Cooper, Annals, Vol. IV., p. 535. 



SUGGESTIONS. 365 

come about that a large number of students pass the 
Previous Examination, or its equivalent, before beginning 
residence. But the present state of things is not satisfac- 
tory. What is already done by many should henceforth 
be done by all. Nor is the Previous a suitable test ; on 
the contrary, it is one of the most grotesquely absurd 
examinations on the face of the earth. Something better 
must be substituted for it. 

The Memorialists above mentioned are obviously 
on right lines when they suggest " that it might be 
advisable to create a single examining body which should 
control both the Previous Examination and the exam- 
inations at present conducted by the Highest Grade 
Schools Examination Syndicate and the Local Examin- 
ations Syndicate." Such a body could frame a proper 
Entrance Examination, excluding therefrom Compulsory 
Greek, which is a great obstacle in the way of boys coming 
from the newer Secondary Schools. There seems no 
reason why this same body should not also hold the 
Entrance Scholarship Examination which might be the 
Honours portion of what the Entrance Examination 
would be the Pass portion. The University has appointed 
the Syndicate asked for, and it is to report before the end 
of the Lent Term, 1914. 

Here again Oxford is ahead of Cambridge. A Statute 
for the reform of Responsions 1 (the Oxford equivalent 
of the Previous Examination) will be promulgated in 
Congregation on Tuesday, October 21. It provides that 
Responsions shall in future be conducted b} T the Delegates 
for the Inspection and Examination of Schools, and 
makes important new regulations. The distinction 
between stated and additional subjects is retained, the 
stated subjects being: (1) Greek; (2) Latin; (3) English; 
(4) Elementary Mathematics; and (5) one subject selected 
from a list which includes French, German, Italian, 
Spanish, English History, Geography, Elementary Politics, 
Elementary Logic, Elementary Trigonometry, Statics and 
Dynamics, and Elementary Physics and Chemistry. The 
Examinations will be held in March, July, September, 
and December, at Oxford, and at such schools and other 

i See The Times, May 29th, 1913. 



3(56 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

places as the Delegates for the Inspection of Schools may 
determine, and a candidate may satisfy the Examiners in 
the same or in separate Examinations, provided that the 
Delegates may prescribe that every candidate shall in one 
Examination satisfy the Examiners in English and in 
other subjects. Additional subjects, necessary for certain 
subsequent Examinations, may be chosen from the 
optional stated subjects. The general purpose of the 
Statute is to substitute for Responsions the school 
certificates of the Oxford and Cambridge Board. With 
the exception of (1) the alternative of set books in Greek 
and Latin, and (2) the addition of the optional subjects, 
the Examination will be of the same character and 
standard as that for school certificates. 

If this Statute receives the approval of Congregation, 
a further Statute will be promulgated, the purpose of 
which is to provide that candidates for the ordinary Arts 
course shall not be allowed to matriculate until they have 
passed in at least three of the subjects required for 
Responsions, and to make provision for conferring a 
temporary status on certain " candidates for matricula- 
tion," who will be subject to University discipline, and, if 
they are ultimately matriculated, will be entitled to count 
the period during which they had the status, for purposes 
of standing and residence. This last regulation applies to 
candidates for Diplomas, Research Degrees, and Degrees 
in Music. A further Statute will be required dealing 
with examination exempting from Responsions. 

These proposals go a long way towards establishing 
an Entrance Examination. It seems a pity that they do 
not go the whole way. 

Our ideal University has now been adjusted to the 
national system of education in three ways : (1) The 
expense of a University course has been reduced to a 
minimum ; (2) the unfit have been excluded by a proper 
Entrance Examination ; (3) the teaching has been made 
sufficient and of the best. The fourth requisite is that 
the students shall be duly tested in the instruction given, 
and true certificates issued of the results. 

We are thus led to the subject of Examinations and 
Degrees. A strange fact confronts the inquirer at the 
threshold. As everybody is supposed to be able to teach 



SUGGESTIONS. 367 

in a Secondary School or a University without any 
previous training, so is he supposed to be able to 
examine by the light of nature. The supposition is a 
dangerous one with regard to teaching ; it is still more 
dangerous with regard to examining. A teacher may 
make a mistake one day, and put it right the next ; 
but an examiner, when once his verdict is announced, 
has no opportunity of revising it, and may unwittingly 
damage or wreck an examinee's career for the whole 
of his life. Cases from time to time crop up of 
candidates who unaccountably fail in their exam- 
inations. Are there no examiners' mistakes among 
them? Again, as an examiner's work is peculiarly delicate 
and important, one would expect to find it particularly 
well paid. On the contrary, it is as a rule badly paid, and 
is looked on as an odd job by which a few pounds can be 
picked up at times when other work is slack. Strange 
that in a country where there are so many examinations, 
and where so much depends on them, there should be so 
little system. This aspect of the case seems almost 
entirely to have escaped notice, and among the many 
educationists with whom the writing of this history has 
brought me in contact, I have found only one who 
has been struck by it. The late Dean Merivale, in his 
evidence before the Royal Commissioners of 1850, said ' : — 
" The conclusions to which I have come are these : What 
is faulty and imperfect in private tuition can only be 
corrected and supplied by raising the standard of College 
and Professorial Lectures, and by care in framing 
College and University Examinations. Much of the 
imperfection of our system is to be traced to the 
inexperience of examiners, and the absence of control 
and system which pervades the Examinations. Education 
in the present day, with the abundance of books and 
other helps, must, I conceive, tend more and more to 
become a cycle of Examinations ; and our best endeavours 
ought to be directed to improving our system in this 
respect. 

" In framing a system of Classical Examinations, such 
as I should like to see instituted in the University, it 

i Report, pp. 174, 175. 



368 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

would be important to lead the students seriatim 
through a range of proper authors. . . 

"I think that it is vain to attempt to assign by- 
legislative enactment the due place and subordination of 
Professors, College Tutors, and private assistants. These 
must and will be regulated by the sense the students 
entertain of their own interests. The only security the 
University can have for the efficiency of the instruction 
imparted through any of these channels is through its 
Examinations. . . I conceive that the University has 
the power of securing that which is the main point to 
aim at by a carefully and methodically arranged system 
of Examinations. At present, the most important 
Classical Examination (that for the Classical Tripos) is 
confided to very young and inexperienced examiners, and 
great complaints are heard of the variable and capricious 
manner in which it has frequently been conducted. 

" Without presuming to give the details of the system 
I would recommend, I venture to urge that the object to 
be attained is a full, searching, and methodical examin- 
ation of the Classical Students three times, at least, in 
the course of their three years. . . If there be these 
three General Examinations appointed, the authors to be 
redd, and the kinds of composition to be practised, should 
be fixed and arranged on a certain system. All this 
would require a perfect understanding between the 
various Examiners, and it could only be worked under 
the supervision of a Board. It would be necessary, I 
conceive, to combine a Board of Permanent Examiners 
with a Staff of a more fluctuating character. . . I 
would try to reduce examination to a science." 

The University of Cambridge has instituted a Board 
of Examinations, which made its first appearance in the 
University Calendar for 1874. It was confined in the 
first instance to the Previous and General Examinations, 
but has since been extended to the Specials, so that it has 
practically to do only with those Examinations which 
lead to a Poll as distinguished from an Honours Degree. 
It is the duty of the Board to consult together from time 
to time on all matters relating to the Examinations in 
question, and to nominate the Examiners. Here is the 
beginning of what Merivale desired to see. There should 



SUGGESTIONS. 369 

be a Board dealing with the Examinations as a whole. 
Some kind of training or preparation for Examination 
work would then be feasible. A beginner could be set to 
do simple work under supervision, and as he showed him- 
self competent and acquired experience, he could work his 
way up. When he had proved himself possessed of special 
capacity, he would be eligible for a permanent place on 
the Board. 

The facts of the case emphasise the need for more 
system. Triposes in general are now divided into two 
parts which cannot be taken in the same year. One 
Tripos, the Oriental Languages, remains undivided. The 
First Part of the Mathematical Tripos may be taken 
at the end of the student's first year, no other First Part 
can be taken till the end of the second year; a Second 
Part cannot, as a rule, be taken till the end of the third 
year ; but in the Theological Tripos, the First Part cannot 
be taken till the end of the third year, when both parts 
may be taken at once. It is also possible to take this 
Tripos up to the end of one's fifth year. In most of 
the Triposes, passing Part I. is now sufficient for a degree, 
provided a Special (the final Examination for the Ordinary 
Degree) other than that in the subject in which the 
candidate has already been examined, be taken in 
addition. As Part I. of the Mathematical Tripos may 
be taken at the end of the first year, an undergraduate 
may spend two years in passing any Special except the 
Mathematical — an extraordinary waste of time. A Part I. 
Law man may take any Special. These regulations gave 
rise to a difficulty. Part I. of a Tripos is generally taken 
at the end of the second year, but three years' residence 
is necessary for a degree. A Special is contemptible in 
the eyes of those who have taken a Tripos, so now a man 
may be excused it, if he resides three years and at the 
end of them can produce a certificate showing he has 
" diligently pursued a course of study in the University." 
This is an arrangement which seems to open the 
door to a dangerous laxity. Why have examinations 
at all, if certificates do as well? And why, too, 
have Second Parts, and then discourage them by 
making them unnecessary for a degree ? In Part I. 
of the Mathematical Tripos the candidates are arranged 



370 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

in three classes, in alphabetical order ; in Part II. 
they are arranged in the same way, but the alpha- 
betical order is qualified by marks of distinction for 
special merit. In the Classical Tripos there are three 
classes with three divisions as a rule in each ; the 
candidates being arranged in alphabetical order in the 
divisions, nine classes being thus made. In the Moral 
Sciences Tripos there are three classes, and the second 
class only is divided into two divisions, the arrangement 
being alphabetical in both classes and divisions. In the 
Law Tripos, arrangement in order of merit still survives. 
In the Classical Tripos, the Examiners are nominated 
partly by the Special Board of Classical Studies and 
partly by the two Colleges whose turn it is to present 
the Proctors for that year. In all other cases they are 
nominated by the particular Special Board concerned. 
There may be reasons for all these differences, but they 
are hidden from all save the specially initiated. Most 
of the Examinations have been frequently altered without 
finality being reached, or a thoroughly satisfactory 
result attained. Others, like the Law Tripos, may 
escape change for nearly a quarter of a century. 

The original principle was unrestricted competition 
— "The one good rule of unfettered and open competition," 
as the Cambridge University Royal Commission Report 
has it. In an unrestricted competition the candidates 
must be placed strictly in order of merit. This necessity 
brings with it a natural preference in the minds of the 
Examiners for that which is easiest to assess and mark. 
Facts are easier to mark than style, because style is a 
matter of opinion and taste, and facts are not. Cambridge 
examination papers, roughly speaking, are long strings of 
questions about facts, and the answering of them is a 
race against time, the man who can write fastest and 
pour out the greatest quantity of facts accurately and 
concisely stated coming out top. The possessor of the 
latest and best fountain pen has an advantage over a 
candidate who sticks to the old-fashioned quills which the 
University still supplies. There has been some reaction 
against this unrestricted competition. The alphabetical 
order, whether in the classes or the brackets, is proof of 
this. The Tripos Regulations also direct the Examiners 



SUGGESTIONS. 371 

to have regard to style, but these modifications do not go 
very far. At Cambridge, facts still hold the highest place 
in popular esteem. 

Of facts there is no end, and the love of them has led 
the University to overload its Honours Examinations and 
make them excessively difficult and complicated. Two 
examples may suffice. Take for one instance the First 
Part of the Classical Tripos. In the old days the whole 
undivided Tripos consisted of eleven papers, six in Trans- 
lation, four in Composition, and one in History. At 
present the First Part of the Tripos consists of fifteen 
papers, five in Translation, four in Composition, and six 
General papers divided as follows : — 

1. Philology and Syntax. 

2. Short passages for translation illustrating Greek 

and Roman History and Antiquities. 

3. General paper in the same. 

4. Short passages illustrating — (1) Greek and Roman 

Philology ; (2) Greek and Latin Literature ; 
(3) Sculpture and Architecture. 

5. General paper on — (1) a set book of Greek Philo- 

sophy ; (2) Greek and Roman Literature ; (3) 
Sculpture and Architecture. 

Philology and Syntax, Greek and Roman History, 
Greek and Roman Antiquities, Greek and Roman Philo- 
sophy, with a set portion of an author in the former, 
Greek and Latin Literature, Sculpture and Architecture ! 
Truly a portentous list, and it all may be taken, and very 
frequently is taken, at the end of a man's second year. 

Yet it may be doubted whether the First Part of the 
Law Tripos is not still more heavily over-loaded. In this 
the subjects are General Jurisprudence, Roman Law, 
English Constitutional Law and History, and Public 
International Law. In the case of the Classical Tripos 
the candidates have had years of School preparation. In 
the case of the Law Tripos there is, or ought to have been, 
none, for Law is not a School subject. The Law student 
thus breaks entirely new ground about the middle of 
October, and before the end of the next May year, or in a 
year and seven months, is supposed to be proficient in all 
the subjects mentioned above. Three of these are particu- 
larly formidable : — Roman Law, English Constitutional 



372 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Law and History, and Public International Law. A man 
can well give a life-time to any one of them. Then there 
is the peculiar choice of General Jurisprudence as the 
fourth subject. The usual order is first the concrete, then 
the abstract ; Arithmetic, for example, is generally taken 
before Algebra ; but in the Law Tripos the student begins 
the study of abstract principles before he is allowed to 
make the acquaintance of English Law at all, and while he 
is wrestling with the totally unfamiliar system of Roman 
Law. Perhaps the reason why Cambridge makes the 
Honours Degrees so hard is because the Poll Degrees are 
so easy, the average of the two representing what may 
fairly be demanded. 

There is just now a reaction against the multi- 
plicity of Examinations, but they can never be wholly 
done away with. Up to a certain point no serious 
student would be without them. They are indispensable 
for testing his knowledge. But when once a student has 
learned how to learn, examinations are superfluous for 
him, and become a hindrance rather than a help. A 
genuine student is impatient of the beaten track, and 
should be left free to choose his own course at the earliest 
possible moment. Again, the Universities have a freedom 
in the matter of examinations which the State has not. 
The State must avoid all appearance of political partiality, 
and therefore is obliged to carry out the competitive 
principle to the full, and adopt the strict order of merit. 
It is the Prize Fellowship system which has exercised a 
like compulsion at Oxford and Cambridge ; but with the 
disappearance of that system, greater liberty will return. 
Some of the elementary principles on which an Examina- 
tion system should be based have thus become apparent. 

1. Too much should not be attempted. It is enough 
to classify the candidates, which means an alphabetical 
order in all cases, without stars or letters, or other circum- 
venting devices. Nor is a superfluity of classes desirable. 
Oxford gives the world four classes in its Honour Schools; 
Cambridge confines this excessive subdivision to its more 
elementary examinations. One wonders whether the 
occupants of the fourth classes ought to be allowed any 
place at all. 

2. The examinations should not be too difficult. 



SUGGESTIONS. 373 

However varied and elaborate a Tripos may be made, 
finished Mathematicians, Classics, Scientists, Historians, 
Theologians, Lawyers, Philosophers, and Economists 
cannot be turned out at from 22 to 23 years of age. If 
the present vain attempts so to do were abandoned, 
students could be admitted to the University at 18, finish 
their preliminary training in three years, and at 21 begin 
their Professional training or be free to continue their 
previous studies. 

3. The Examinations should not entail excessive 
strain. The Triposes were divided to relieve the strain 
on the candidates. This principle should be adopted in 
every case, and both parts of a Tripos made necessary to 
a degree. 1 

4. Cram is best avoided, not by asking many ques- 
tions, but by giving a wide choice, plenty of time, and 
insisting on a thorough knowledge in such questions as 
are selected. 

A Special Board, proceeding on well defined lines, 
would give the unity and consistency which are now 
lacking in the Cambridge Examinations. 

The University of Cambridge, with all its piling up of 
papers and demands for an exhaustive knowledge, still 
sends forth annually many graduates who cannot properly 
be called educated men. The following are the opening 
sentences of the Preface to Notes on the Composition of 
Scientific Papers, by Sir Clifford Allbutt, the Regius Pro- 
fessor of Physic at Cambridge University: — "In the course 
of the year I peruse sixty or seventy theses for the degree 
of M.B. and about twenty-five for the degree of M.D. The 
matter of these theses is good, it is often excellent; in 
composition a few are good, but the greater number are 
written badly, some very ill indeed. The prevailing 
defect of their composition is not mere inelegance ; were 
it so, it were unworthy of educated men : it is such as to 
obscure, to perplex, and even to hide or to travesty the 
sense itself." In plain language, these M.B.'s and M.D.'s 
cannot write their own mother tongue. The absence of 
an Entrance Examination, with a proper standard of 

i If ever a Royal Commission is appointed, it should, among other 
things, take medical evidence as to the effect of the Triposes on the 
mental and physical conditions of the examinees. 



374 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

attainment in English, is partly to blame for this lament- 
able state of things. Would it not be well for men taking 
such subjects as Engineering and Natural Science to 
study them historically and biographically ? They would 
thus be introduced to great ideas and great men, with the 
possibility of good educational results. 

There remains the question of the Pass Examinations 
— ought they to be retained at all ? Many of the re- 
formers, as we have seen, have been in favour of getting 
rid of the Poll men altogether ; but they are an established 
institution, and may be counted on to struggle hard for 
their lives. The Colleges will be on their side, as they are 
a profitable source of income. The Pass men are charged 
the same tuition fee as the Honours men, but they cost 
less to teach, because they are taught less. The University 
knows them not, save to examine them, and take fees and 
dues from them. Both processes are profitable to it ; so 
that until the clay of financial reform conies, the Pass men 
will hold their ground. An improvement, however, has 
been made of late years in the Pass course. Of old it was 
Previous Examination, General Examination, Special 
Examination. Since the change referred to, a Poll man 
may take two Specials, instead of the General and a 
Special. A further extension of this power of choice 
might have beneficial results. The Triposes are highly- 
specialised examinations, too much so from an educational 
point of view, though the modern practice of allowing 
a candidate to take the First Part of one Tripos and then 
the Second Part of another is a counteracting influence. 
General knowledge, as opposed to special knowledge, is at 
a heavy discount in Cambridge ; but other Universities 
think more highly of it, notably those in the United 
States. If there were a proper examination before 
entrance to the University, and a student had to take 
three Specials, one at the end of each year, and these 
were made into examinations worth passing, a course 
of study could be marked out embodying the principle 
of variety as opposed to that of specialisation. Such a 
course of study would appeal to a large number of men, 
and might fairly be rewarded with a degree. There 
should be an ample range of choice— Classics, Mathe- 
matics, Divinity, History, Law, Modern Languages, 



SUGGESTIONS. 375 

Economics, and the various branches of Natural Science 
— but the student should be compelled always to take 
some literary subject or subjects, so as to insure his 
getting a humanising education. The University might 
then be asked to organise a course of instruction on 
these lines. 

The nation may also fairly claim that when a Uni- 
versity tests knowledge it should accurately describe the 
results ; in other words, a degree should be a real proof of 
achievement. The Universities of Oxford and Cambridge 
fail to come up to this standard in two notable respects, 
to mention no others. Firstly, they give the same titles 
of B.A. and M.A. to Pass men and Honours men alike ; 
secondly, they give the degree of M.A. without any quali- 
fications beyond those required for the B.A., save those of 
being three years older, and of having paid an additional 
fee. In both these respects their degrees tend to deceive 
an ignorant but confiding public. The first shortcoming" 
might be met by making the Poll degree really worth 
having, as previously suggested. The second might be 
met by doing away with the B.A. degree altogether and 
giving the M.A. at once. The only difficulty in the way is 
the pecuniary one. 

It has been previously pointed out that genuine 
students should be relieved from the confining and 
cramping influence of examinations at the earliest 
possible moment. The University of Cambridge has of 
late years done something to encourage the class known 
as Advanced or Research Students. Should not Oxford 
and Cambridge more and more make it their aim to be 
the places for advanced work and research, the Professorial 
teaching being chiefly utilised for these two purposes? 
Local Universities are springing up all over the country. 
They bring instruction to the student's own doors, and 
can thus teach him cheaply; they are not hampered by 
old traditions or obsolete methods, and are thus free to 
develop on their own lines. These local Universities 
ought to feed the older foundations with their best men, 
and they would do so if Oxford and Cambridge were 
properly organised. The structure of national education 
would then be on the way to completion. 

This last consideration leads naturally on to the 



376 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

kindred subject of the Endowment of Research. This 
is a difficult problem. The amount of money available 
for it is small. The University has a few Studentships^ 
some of the Colleges give Research Studentships, and 
an occasional Research Fellowship. The present system 
is not above criticism. The usual plan is to give a 
Studentship or a Fellowship to some young man who 
has just taken a brilliant degree, and then to turn 
him loose to pursue his own way. The University or 
the College makes, in fact, a speculative investment ; it 
may yield a handsome return, or it may prove a failure. 
The young men in question often spend the first year 
of their time in making up their minds as to what line 
of research they will pursue. Sometimes the Student- 
ship runs out at the end of a year. If a student has 
not already struck out a line of his own, why is he given 
money before he has proved that he can use it to good 
purpose ? If he has struck out a profitable line of investi- 
gation, why cut him short just when he is beginning to 
pay for encouragement ? 

This evil, the short period for which a Studeutship 
can be granted, is occasionally mitigated by the grant of 
a Research Fellowship. But this plan is only a mitiga- 
tion. There is a great reluctance to prolong these 
Fellowships much beyond the normal six or seven years. 
Even Research Fellows are human ; they want a definite 
career so that they can marry and settle down. At 
present their prospects are of the most precarious nature. 

The promotion of Research is obviously a work 
that should be undertaken in common. The University 
should direct it in co-operation with the Colleges, and 
there must be machinery for the purpose. The General 
Board of Studies in our reformed University would have 
enough to do in organising the teaching. A Special 
Board for Advanced Study and Research should be insti- 
tuted. Existing resources could then be better utilised. 
The University Scholarships and Prizes might also be 
examined with a view to utilising them for research 
purposes. They should be awarded, as far as possible, on 
the results of the Triposes, so as to avoid the multiplica- 
tion of examinations. If these proved insufficient, appeal 
might be made to the State and to private individuals. 



SUGGESTIONS. 377 

Then as to the persons who should do Research ; 
obviously those who already know the most, and are thus 
at the borders of their subject, can best tell how those 
borders may be extended. It is the most advanced 
teachers, the Professors and sub-Professors, who should 
be encouraged to undertake further investigations. To 
enable them to do so, it would be necessary to set them 
free from teaching, either entirely for short periods, or 
partially for longer periods. Teaching and Research 
must be linked more closely together. Teaching can be 
made a career ; and the difficulty of paying adequately 
for Research, and getting value for the money expended, 
can thus be surmounted. The payment would be for 
the Teaching, and the Research would come in inci- 
dentally. With the highest ranks of University teachers 
the most brilliant of the younger men would naturally be 
associated. If the Advanced Students are handed over as 
suggested to the Professors, they will form the natural 
body from which to draw the Research Students, Advanced 
Study and Research going naturally together. An under- 
graduate, for example, who has just taken a first-class in 
the Second Part of the Classical Tripos would not be 
awarded a Studentship for a single year and then be 
abandoned to shift for himself; he would be offered the 
opportunity of continuing his studies at Cambridge or 
elsewhere, under the actual instruction and guidance 
of a Professor or other approved person. Then, if he 
showed aptitude, he should be enabled to continue 
his special work, and as soon as possible be given a 
teaching post, the duties of which were not too onerous. 
In this way, after a few years, the genuine lovers of 
Research would be discovered. They are the enthusi- 
asts who only want to be enabled to live in order 
to give themselves entirely to learning. They might 
be made in due course Professors Emeriti, and be 
allowed to teach or lecture just as much or as little 
as they pleased. A Board of Advanced Studies and 
Research, with sufficient funds and accumulating ex- 
perience, might be trusted to work out a solution of a 
problem which has hitherto been very inadequately dealt 
with. 



378 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

The Library difficulty has not yet been solved at 
Cambridge. 1 Each College has its library, so that with 
the University Library, Cambridge possesses eighteen col- 
lections of books, none of them satisfactory. The University 
Library does wonders with insufficient funds. It cannot 
buy and house all the books it would, nor can it arrange 
them so as to be of the greatest advantage to students. It 
has long desired to have a Central Reading-room, with 
the necessary books, reference, and a proper staff of 
assistants, but it cannot afford it. 

If the University Library with its privileges under 
the Copyright Act cannot do what it would, how hopeless 
is it for even the richest College to try to succeed where 
the University fails. Here again salvation can only come 
through co-operation. The University and Colleges must 
do the work between them. The University must 
definitely undertake a certain portion of it, say, the 

1 The following were the sums expended by the Colleges on their 
Libraries as shown by the last Abstract of Accounts {Cambridge Uni- 
versity Reporter, February 19th, 1913) : — 

Peterhouse 
Clare ... 
Pembroke 
Caius ... 
Trinity Hall 
Corpus ... 

King's Corporate Income 
Trust Funds 

Queens' Corporate Income 

Trust Fund ... ... 109 17 10 109 17 10 

St. Catharine's Corporate Income 

Trust ... ... ... 36 11 4 36 11 4 

Jesus Corporate Income 

Trust 
Christ's Corporate Income 

Trust ... 

St. John's 

Magdalene (Library and Plate) ... 

Trinity (including Librarian's 

Dividend) 
Emmanuel 

Sidney Corporate Income 
Trust 

Downing (Library and Prizes) ... 

The University Library for 1912 cost about £8,000. 



£ s. 


d. 


£ s. 

116 13 
42 18 
89 11 

267 6 


a. 

6 
2 

7 
2 


80 6 
117 13 


2 

4 


173 13 

1Q7 1Q 


6 

ft 



■ r )4 


11 


3 


54 


11 


3 


7!) 


13 


3 








25 


18 


1 














105 
337 


11 
2 


4 

G 














30 


3 











1447 














70 








is 





2 








76 


6 


6 














94 
79 


6 

8 


8 











£3252 


14 


4 



SUGGESTIONS. 379 

providing the Reading Room and Reference Library with 
works of General Literature and foreign books; the 
Colleges specialising in, say, some technical branch. A 
beginning on something like these lines has already 
been made. The Squire Law Library has relieved the 
University Library to some extent. Then there is a 
specialised library at the Museum of Archaeology, and 
the various Laboratories are beginning to form libraries 
of their own. But these developments merely transfer the 
burden from one part of the University to another. The 
Colleges must come in and help. That they should do so 
has long been the intention of the Legislature, as may be 
seen by reference to the Act of 1877 [Clause 18, (4)] , which 
empowered the Commissioners to frame Statutes whereby 
the Colleges, under certain conditions, could hand over 
the whole or portions of their libraries to the University. 
This is a power which the Commissioners never exercised. 
The Colleges ought also to spend so much a year in pro- 
viding books, as agreed on with the central authority, 
each College Library to be open at proper hours to duly 
accredited students. 

Some drastic changes will have to be made before this 
scheme could become effective. The housing of a con- 
tinually increasing number of books is always a problem. 
The old and worthless must be sacrificed to the new, as 
the new in their turn will have to be to the newer. The 
shelves of the University and College Libraries are 
cumbered with books which are never moved from their 
places except when they are dusted. Suppose a time 
limit were enacted, and all books were removed that had 
not been read or consulted for a hundred years. It would 
provide a large amount of valuable space. Then there 
must be in these eighteen libraries many duplicates. 
The superfluous volumes could be sold or otherwise 
disposed of, and so more room could be found. 

The Royal Commissioners of 1850 were of opinion 
that the privilege which the Copyright Act gives to the 
University might be advantageously commuted for a 
money payment to be expended in the purchase of such 
books as might be deemed worth preserving. 1 There is 

i Report, p. 129. 



380 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

grave doubt as to whether the word "advantageously" 
is here rightly used. A money payment is fixed, but the 
number of books goes on continually increasing, so that 
it may be better to have the books than the money. If 
the money payment could be made to increase with the 
number and value of the books published, it might be 
more advantageous to have the money, as it could be 
used in the purchase of foreign as well as of home- 
produced books. 

The Prime Minister informed the House of Commons 
on its reassembling in May, 1913, after the Whitsuntide 
recess, that it was not the intention of the Government 
to advise the issue of a Royal Commission. Two widely 
different interpretations may be put on this announce- 
ment ; the first is that the present Ministry do not think 
University Reform is pressing ; the other is that they 
hold it to be so ripe for treatment that legislation is 
possible at once without the delay involved in the holding 
of a further inquiry. If I may give my own opinion, 
University Reform is pressing ; but the issues which it 
raises are so many and so complicated, and have, as far 
as my knowledge goes, been so little discussed, that further 
inquiry is necessary. This would, according to precedent, 
take the form of a Royal Commission. Legislation would 
follow in due course, laying down general principles and 
setting up a Statutory Body to carry them out in detail. 
Here Parliament must avoid the mistake of past years. 
The Executive Commissioners of 1852, 1854 and 1877 all 
failed fully to carry out the intentions of the Legislature. 
Any fresh Executive Commission should have the lines 
on which it is to proceed so marked out that no falling 
short is possible. Then the Universities could be started 
once for all on a course of natural development, and the 
next Royal Commission be the third and the last. 



SUMMARY OF SUGGESTIONS. 

Part I. The University. 

The Chancellor. 

The nominal duties of the office to be abolished, the 
real duties to remain as at present, with extended powers 
of deciding appeals from the various Boards and Colleges. 

The Vice-Chancellor . 

To be the permanent acting head of the University, 
chosen without restriction by the Electoral Roll, with an 
adequate salary and an official residence, retiring on 
pension when an age limit has been reached, and having 
a Deputy also chosen without restriction by the Electoral 
Roll, with salary, etc.; the Vice-Chancellor and the Deputy- 
Vice-Chancellor to be ex officio members of all Boards and 
Syndicates, but each Board or Syndicate to choose its 
own Chairman, who shall be responsible for its business. 

The Council of the Senate. 

To consist of the Vice-Chancellor and Deputy- Vice- 
Chancellor, the Chairmen of the General Board of 
Studies, the Financial Board, the Board of Examinations, 
the Board of Management and Works, and the Board of 
Advanced Studies and Research, ex officio, and eleven 
other members chosen from and elected by the Electoral 
Roll without restriction. 

The Electoral Roll, or Senate. 

The Electoral Roll to become the Senate, and to con- 
sist of the Senior 450 M.A.'s or persons of equal or superior 
degree holding University or College office, together with 
50 other members co-opted on the nomination of such 
outside educational bodies as shall hereafter be deter- 
mined on. This body to have all the legislative and 
administrative powers now possessed either by the 
Electoral Roll or the Senate. 



382 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

The General Board of Studies. 

To have control both of University and College teach- 
ing, in conjunction with the Special Boards in each subject; 
to arrange for the requisite staff, and for its payment, in 
conjunction with the Financial Board. 

The Board of Examinations. 

To have the superintendence of all Examinations, to 
nominate and train Examiners. 

The Board of Advanced Studies and Research. 

To have the superintendence of Advanced Studies, 
Post-Graduate Studies, and Research, and of the special 
funds available for these purposes, together with such 
additional funds as the Financial Board may vote from 
time to time. 

The Financial Board. 

To administer the University finances, to provide 
funds for the work of the various Boards, and to have 
power over capital expenditure by the Colleges. 

The Board of Management and Works. 

To take over and do for the Colleges in common the 
work now done by Bursars, Stewards and Tutors, so far 
as these last are concerned with money matters. 

Appeals. 

In the case of any disagreement between the Colleges 
and the Administrative Boards, or between the Admin- 
istrative Boards themselves, an appeal to lie to the 
Chancellor, whose decision shall be final. 

Finance. 

The Common University Fund to be increased to 
not less than one-fifth, and not more than one-half, 
of the assessable College incomes. All University and 
College accounts to be publicly audited. Pensions and 
age limits to be attached to all University and College 
offices. 



SUMMARY OF SUGGESTIONS. 383 

Conditions of Entrance. 

All students to pass an examination before entrance 
to the University, in which Greek shall not be a 
compulsory subject. Distinctions of nobleman, fellow- 
commoner, pensioner, sizar, to be abolished. Students as 
a rule to enter at 18, and graduate after a three years' 
course. 

Entrance Scholarships. 

To be awarded by the University on the results of an 
examination held as near as possible to the date of entry. 

Terms. 

Ten weeks' instruction to be given in each of the 
three Terms. 

Degrees. 

The B.A. degree to be abolished and the M.A. 
substituted for it. 

Application of Savings. 

The money saved by the grouping of the Colleges, the 
centralising of the administrative work, the co-ordination 
of the teaching, the abolition of Fellowship emoluments, 
and the reduction in the value of Scholarships, to be 
applied, under statutory obligation, to 

(1) The reduction of the cost of a University career 

by reducing or abolishing all fees, dues, and 
charges for tuition ; 

(2) The payment of adequate salaries with pensions ; 

(3) The institution of a Reserve Fund ; 

(4) The endowment of Research and the extension 

and improvement of University teaching ; 

(5) The training of teachers and examiners ; 

(6) The provision of University Scholarships for 

intending teachers, physicians and surgeons ; 

(7) University Extension. 



384 UNIVERSITY REFORM. 

Part II. The Colleges. 

The Colleges to be grouped according to the scheme 
already laid down. Each group to govern itself under 
one working Head, in accordance with a scheme framed 
by itself, embodying the administrative reforms already 
outlined, and approved by a Statutory Authority, or in 
default of such a scheme, under a scheme framed by the 
Statutory Authority itself; and to provide the share of 
instruction laid upon it by the General Board of Studies. 



LIST OF AUTHORITIES. 



Allbutt, Sir CLIFFORD. Notes on. Composition of Scientific Papers. 

CAMPION, Rev. W. M. Cambridge Essays, 1858. 

Cooper. Annals of Cambridge. 

COPLESTON, Bp. Reply to the Calumnies of the Edinburgh Review. 

CURZON, Earl. Principles and Methods of University Reform. 

Dictionary of National Biography. 

Donaldson, Dr. Classical Scholarship and Classical Learning. 

Edinburgh Review. Vols. XL, XIV., XV., XVIL, LIL, LIIL, LIV., LX. 

[Grant, A. R.] The Next Step. 

Gray, A., M.A. Jesus College. 

Hamilton, Sir William. Discussions (Second Edition). 

Hansard. Parliamentary Debates. 

Jebb, Dr. Quoted by Dr. Whewell, in Of a Liberal Education. 

Lyell, Sir Charles. Travels in North America. 

Molesworth, W. N. History of England. 

MORLEY, Lord. Life of Gladstone. 

MULLINGER, J. B. The University of Cambridge. 

Newman, Cardinal. The Idea of a University. 

Historical Sketches. 
Pattison, Mark. Suggestions on Academic Organization. 
Essays on the Endowment of Research. 
Peacock, Rev. George. Observations on the Statutes. 
PRICE, Prof. Bonamy. Suggestions for the Extension of Professorial 

Teaching in the University of Oxford. 
Oxford Reform. 
Quarterly Review, April, 1906. 

Report of the Royal Commission of 1850 : Cambridge. 
Report of the Royal Commission of 1850 : Oxford. 
Report of the Royal Commission of 1872 : Oxford and Cambridge. 
Report of the Royal Commission on Secondary Education, 1895. 
Report of the Royal Commission on University Education in London, 1913. 
Report of the University Reform Committee, Cambridge. 
Smith, Prof. Goldwin. Reorganization of the University of Oxford. 
Tennyson, Charles. Cambridge from Within. 
Venn, J. A. Oxford and Cambridge Matriculations. 

Statistical Chart. 
Whewell, Dr. William. Of a Liberal Education. 

Study of Mathematics. 
WRATISLAW, A. H., M.A. Observations on the Cambridge System. 

CC 



INDEX. 



Aberdeen, Earl of 133 

Accounts 223 

Act of Uniformity 201 

Acts of Parliament 10, 204 

Advowsons 221, 222 

Africa, South 340 

Albert, Prince, Chancellor of Cam- 
bridge University 105, 106 

Allbutt, Sir Clifford 373 

Anatomy 72 

Apparatus 222 

Arnold, Kev. T., of Rugby 92 

Arnold, Matthew 260 

Articles, the Thirty-nine 30, 59, 
146, 152, 201 

Arts and Faculties 3, 9 

Asquith, H. H., Prime Minister 
380 

Auditing of Accounts 315 

Australia 341 

Awdry, Sir J. W. 144 n. 



Baden-Powell, Prof. 107 
Baines, Rt. Hon. M. T. 153 
Bateson, Rev. W. H. 112, 206 
Bellamy, Dr. James 219 
Benefices 267 ; presentation to 

221, 222 
Beresford-Hope, A. J., M.P. 103 
Bernard, Dr. Montagu 219 
Bible Clerks 9 
Blackburn, Lord 348 
Blakesley, Rev. J. W. 326, 363 
Boards of Studies : General 231- 

232 ; Special 230 
Boards of Faculties 234 
Borrowing powers 223, 315 
Bouverie, Rt. Hon. E. P. 151, 219 
Bright, John, M.P. 144, 200 
Brougham, Lord 60, 198 
Buildings 222 ; extension of 227 



Cambridge University : — 
A Lay Corporation 1 
Appeals 382 
Auditors 307 
B.A. Examination 101 
Board of Examinations 345, 368, 

382 
Board of Management and Works 

382 



Cambridge University— cont. 
Board of Advanced Studies and 

Research 345, 376, 377, 382 
Board of Studies, General 118, 

323, 324, 329, 382 
Boards of Studies, Special 117- 

120, 323, 324, 370 
Borrowing powers 315 
Buildings 354 
Bursars and Treasurers 307, 309 

311 
Bye-Fellowships 123, 124, 155 
Capitation Charge 271, 360 
Caput Senatus 11, 12, 113, 153 
Career Scholarships 335 
Cartwright, Thomas 10 
Caution Money 360 
Celibacy 124 
Central Board 312 
Chancellor 5, 342, 381 
Chaplains, Catechists, Readers 

307 
Civil Service 330 
Classics 358, 362 
' Close ' Fellowships and Scholar- 
ships 112 
College Clubs 356 
College Laboratories 296 
College Lectures 324 
College Libraries 378 
Combination of Colleges 313,321 
Commission, Report of Royal 

1, 11 n., 67, 112-132, 333, 338 
Common University Fund 228- 

229, 274, 285, 312, 382 
Contributions of Colleges 285 
Council of Senate 343, 347, 349, 

381 
Council of Studies 130-131 
Cram, to avoid 373 
Day Training College 353 
Degrees 353, 383 
Demonstrators 354 
Deans and Sub-Deans 307 
Deputy Vice-Chancellor 343 
Diplomas 353 
Directors and Supervisors of 

Studies 307 
Disputations 113 
Divinity Degrees 304 
Electoral Roll 154, 262, 345, 347, 

348, 350, 351, 381 
Entrance Examination 363, 364, 

365, 366, 373, 383 



INDEX. 



387 



Cambridge University— cont. 
Entrance Scholarships 358, 383 
Estates, College 310-311 
Exhibitions 155, 356, 357, 359 
Fees 355, 360, 383 
Federation 340 
Fellowships 79, 123, 129, 155, 

281, 330, 337, 339 
Fellows, election of 123, 129 
Financial Board 316, 345, 382 
General Examination 368, 374 
Graces 5, 113 

Greek, compulsory 349 

Grouping of Colleges 328, 384 

Halls 126, 359 

Head-masters' Conference 346 

History 358, 362 

Holy Orders 124 

Honours 300 

Hostels 126, 359, 360 

House Property 269, 312 

Income of University 282 

Incomes of Colleges 274-277, 

279-281 
Incorporated 1 
Inter-Collegiate Lectures 317 
Jesus College 225 
Junior Optimes 36 
King's 7, 16; Undergraduate 

Fellows of 107 
Law 152 
Lectures 323 
Lecturers, College 79, 307 
Lecturers, University 116, 117, 

282, 354 

Lectureships 122, 329, 330; 
Senior and Junior 340 

Legislative Assembly 350 

Library 128, 378 ; Reading-room 
at 128, 378 

Librarians 307 

Local Examinations 101, 364 

Masters, Vice-Masters, Presi- 
dents 307, 340 

Mathematics 4, 38, 39, 358, 
362 

Matriculation 352, 360 

Medicine 152, 336 ; Degrees in 
353 

Memorandum of Resident Fellows 
to Mr. Gladstone 206-207 ; 
Mr. Gladstone's Reply 207-208 

Memorial to Senate 261 ; recom- 
mendations rejected 263 

Modern Languages 362 

Moderators 4, 32, 33, 35 

Music, Degrees in 353 

National Education 351 

National Union of Teachers 346 

Natural Sciences 362 



Cambridge University— cont. 
Non - Collegiate Students 126, 

135, 356, 360 
Non-Regents 5, 44, 112 
Non-Regent House 11, 113, 

114 
Non-resident Fellows 80, 129, 

334 
Officers' Training Corps 353 
Organisation 342 
Organists and Choirmasters 307 
Pass Examinations 374 
Pensionaries 126 
Physwick Hostel 126 
Poll Degrees 301 
Previous Examination 365, 368, 

374 
Prize Fellowships 281, 333, 334, 

335 
Prizes, University 376 
Proctors 6, 34, 35, 114 
Professors 78, 114, 117, 122, 282, 

377 
Professorships 121-123, 329, 340, 

354 
Readers, University 282, 354 
Readerships 329 
Reform Committee 349 
Regent House 11, 112 
Regents 5, 12, 44, 49 
Registrary 131, 307 
Research 334, 336-337, 375, 376, 

377 
Reserve Fund 383 
Residence denned 348 
Resident Fellows 334 
Scholarships 129, 155, 356, 357- 

358, 360, 362, 376, 383 
Scholarship Examinations 361 
Science 279, 358 
Scrutators 11, 114 
Senate 6, 112, 262, 347, 349, 

350 ; Non-resident members of 

346 
Sextumviri 12 
Special Examinations 368, 369, 

374 
Squire Law Library 379 
Statistical Tables 269, 270, 273, 

274, 275, 276, 297, 298, 300, 301, 

303, 378 
Stewards 307, 313 
Stocks 274, 316 
Studentships 376 
Sub-Professorships 340 
Teachers, University 283, 354 
Terms 383 
Tests 126, 128 ; abolition of 225, 

349 
Theology 152 



388 



INDEX. 



Cambridge University— cont. 
Tripos : Mathematical 17, 20, 
353, 369-370 ; Law 353, 370, 
371,372; Classical 20,319,353, 
368, 370, 371, 377; Moral 
Sciences 105, 128, 353, 370 ; 
Natural Sciences 105, 128, 353 ; 
Theological 353,369; Historical 
353 ; Oriental Languages 353 ; 
Economics 353 ; Anthropologi- 
cal 353 
Tuition Fees 271, 383 
Tuition Fund 281 
Tutors 78, 79, 115, 307, 308 
Unattached Students 125 
Undergraduates at Cambridge 

Colleges 297 
University Chest 273 
Vice-Chancellor 5, 342, 343, 381 
Women, Degrees for 349, 351 
Wranglers 36 
Cambridge in 1800 17 
Cambridge Reform Committee, 
Report of 262-263, 320-322, 345, 
354-356 
Cambridge University Bill 151, 

217 
Cambridge University Calendar 

297 n. 
Cambridge University Reporter 

297 n., 323-324 
Camden, Marquis 60 
Campion, Rev. W. M. 62 n. , 85 n. , 

105 n., 159 
Canada 341 
Canning, Viscount 146 
Capitation charges 270-271 
Carlingford, Lord 217 
Carnarvon, Earl of 216 
Cavendish, Lord Frederick 206 
Caution Money 272-273 
Cecil, Sir William 10-11 
Celibacy 9, 14, 144 
Chancellor 5, 163 
Chapel, attendance at 205 
Charles II. 201 
Chemistry 72, 230 
Christie, W. D., M.P. 102, 199 
Church and State 10, 63 
Cleveland, Duke of 206, 212 
Clinton, Lord 206 
Cockburn, Lord Chief Justice 219, 

348 
Coleridge, Sir J. T. 144 n. 
Coleridge, Sir J. D. 201 
Collections 222 

Colleges 6, 48 ; foundation 17 ; 
compared with monasteries 8 ; 
revenues 213, 223 ; combination 
224 ; income 226 



Common University Fund 228- 

229, 234 
Congregation 140, 141, 144, 147 
Contributions from Colleges 142, 

226 
Cooper In., 13, 106, 113n., 130n., 

198-199, 305, 363 
Copleston, Bp. 20, 21, 25-26, 27, 

28, 29-32, 46, 60, 83-84 
Corruption 51 
Curzon, Earl 67, 233-261, 283-289, 

295, 296, 308, 309, 311, 313-315, 

318, 322, 327, 347, 350, 358, 363 



DAMPIER, J. L. 107 

Degrees 3, 16, 44, 55, 58 

Derby, Earl of 133, 199-200 

Dickson, J. H. D. 354 

Dilke, Sir Charles, M.P. 217, 218 

Disputations 4, 332 

Dissenters 37, 51, 52, 58, 143, 

144, 146, 153, 200, 202 
Divinity Degrees 198, 225, 304 
Doctors 48 

Donaldson, Dr. 67, 81-82, 98, 363 
Donaldson, Rev. S. A. 347-349 
Duncannon, Lord 60 



Edinburgh Review 20, 21-25, 26, 

37, 38n., 69 
Edgeworth, R. L. 24 
Education, Government scheme 

294 
Edward VI. 201 
Elementary Schools 244 
Elizabeth, Queen 201 
Ellesmere, Earl of 144 n. 
Emoluments 221, 222 
Endowment 221 
Espriella, Don Manuel 21 
Esquire Bedells 6, 113 
Estates 227, 266 
Examinations for Degrees 4, 20, 

58 
Executive Commission proposed 

by Mr. Gladstone 137 
Exhibitions 220, 266 
Expenditure 272 



Faculties 3, 9, 43, 44, 63 
Fawcett, Prof. 201 
Federalism 293 
Fellows 46 ; non-resident 9 
Fellow-commoners 34, 57 
Fellowships 134, 142, 144, 214, 267, 

332, 333 
Financial Board 229 



INDEX. 



389 



Financial resources 264-291 
Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond 201 
Foundations 265, 267 



Gibson, Milner, M.P. 199 

Gilbert, W. S. 242 

Gladstone, Et. Hon. W. E., M.P. 
101, 108, 133, 135, 136, 137, 138, 
144, 145, 148, 150, 198, 202, 203, 
205-206, 206-207, 207-208, 217, 
218, 236, 264 

Gog and Magog 22 

Gore, Bp. (of Oxford) 233, 241, 
248, 358 

Goschen, Rt. Hon. G. J., M.P. 
202, 218 

Governing Body 234 

Graham, Bp. (of Chester) 1 12, 153 

Grammar 3, 58 

Gray, A. 225, 304 

Groups of Colleges 299 

Grove, Dr. William 219 



Halls 48 See Cambridge, Ox- 
ford 

Hamilton, Sir William 17n., 28, 
37, 38-57, 61, 64, 65, 66, 67, 84, 
92, 102n., 131, 150, 154, 162, 
254, 296, 326 

Hardy, Rt. Hon. Gathorne, M.P. 
218 

Hatherton, Lord 60 

Heads of Houses, privileges 11, 49 

Heathcote, Sir William 145, 148 

Hemming, G. W. 219 

Herschell, Sir John 112 

Heywood, James, M.P. 103, 108, 
143, 144, 146, 153, 156, 199, 200 

Hinds, Bp. (of Norwich) 107 

Hodgson, K.D. 206 

Holland, Lord 60, 198 

Holy Orders 218 

Hostels In., 7 See Cambridge, 
Oxford 

House Property 266, 269 

Howley, Abp. 59 



Idle Fellowships 214 
Illegality 51 

Income of Universities and Col- 
leges 269, 298 
Inglis, Sir Robert 103 
Innes, H. McLeod 262 



James, I. 13, 152, 201 
Jeffrey, Lord 20 



Jervis, Sir John, Attorney-General 

105 
Jesuits 102 n. 
Jeune, Dr. 107 
Johnson, Rev. G. H. S. 107 
Jowett, Dr. Benjamin 101, 110, 

136, 137, 240, 241, 260 



KEBBEL, T. E. 27 



Laboratories 229, 296 

Ladv Margaret 5 

Lands 266, 268 

Latin 4, 9, 31, 149 

Laud, Abp. 13, 48, 49, 51 

Law 3, 63 

Leases, beneficial 224, 268 

Lecture rooms 229 

Lecturers 11 See Cambridge, 

Oxford 
Lectureships 142, 220, 221, 266 
Legislation 198-232 
Legislative interference 162 
Leicester, Robert Dudley, Earl of, 

13, 51, 62, 201 
Libraries 222, 229 
Liddell, Dr. H. G. 107 
Lightfoot, Prof. (Bp. of Durham) 

219 
Logic 58 

Longley, Abp. 144 n. 
Lonsdale, Bp. (of Lichfield) 153 
Louvain 47 

Lowe, Rt. Hon. Robert, M.P. 101 
Lyell, Sir Charles 67, 70-76 
Lyndhurst, Lord 153, 156 
Lytton, Lord 60 



Magistrates of the University 50 
Mary, Queen 201 
Masters 7, 44, 48 
Mathematics 4, 17, 58 
Medicine 3, 63 
Melancthon 102 n. 
Melbourne, Viscount 60, 198 
Merivale, Dean 326, 363, 367- 

368 
Miall, Edward, M.P. 143, 200 
Molesworth 104 
Monasteries, Dissolution of 265 
Morley, Earl of 216 
Morley, Lord 101, 106, 136, 143, 

145 
Morgan, Osborne, M.P. 217 
Mullinger, J. B. 2, 3, 5, 7 
Museums 229 



390 



INDEX. 



Natural Sciences 55, 58, 72, 296 
Newcastle, Duke of 17 
Newman, Cardinal 19-20, 37, 51, 

67, 69, 85, 87 n., 94-97, 292, 363 
Newton, Sir Isaac 17, 64 ; his 

Principia 35, 40 
Next Step, The 77 
Noblemen 57 

Nonconformists 62, 63, 160, 204 
Non-resident Fellows 15, 79 
Non-resident voters 14 



Oath of Supremacy 152 
O'Connell, Daniel 198 
Oral teaching 4 
Ordination, compulsory 144 
Oxford University : — 

Accounts 285 

Amalgamation of Colleges 179, 
183, 245 

Ancient House of Congregation 
236 

Annual payment to University 
270 

Architecture 190 

Architect, University 259 

Art 190 

As it is 53 

As it might be 54 

Balance-sheet, University and 
Colleges 284 

Balliol 53 

Biological Sciences 179, 183 

Board of Education 196 

Board of Examinations 184 

Board of Faculties 256, 257 

Board of Finance 289-291 

Bodleian Library 285 

Business Education 254 

Caution Money 246 

Celibacy 110 

Chemistry 72, 179 

Christ Church 53, 62 

Clarendon Press 24, 260, 288 

Classics 4, 190, 193, 250 

Clerk of Works 259 

' Close ' Fellowships and Scholar- 
ships 158 

College Statutes 258 

Commission, Report of Koyal 1, 
15, 67, 107-112, 264 

Common University Fund 260, 
288 

Congregation 44, 48, 49, 111, 147, 
164, 197, 217, 235, 344 

Constitution 164-167, 235 

Contributions of Colleges 150 

Convocation 6, 44, 48, 49, 73, 
147, 165, 237-241, 344 



Oxford University— cont. 
Corpus 62 

Council, University 234 
Curators of the Chest 259 
Delegacy 195 
Diplomas 366 
Dues 246 
Engineering 190 
English Tongue in Congregation 

149 
Endowments 166-175, 234 
Entrance Examination 194, 235 
Estates, Management of 287 
Examinations 92, 184-185, 252 
Examination Statute 100 
Exhibitions 169, 170, 234, 247, 

248 
Faculties 181-183, 188, 194, 257 
Fees 246 
Fellows 87, 88 
Fellowships 110, 172-173, 192, 

234 
Financial Board proposed 166 
' Greats ' 188 

Greek in Responsions 235, 252 
Halls, Public and Private 149, 

243 
Headships 192, 280 
Hebdomadal Board 73, 111, 140, 

158 
Hebdomadal Council 140, 141, 

144, 147, 164, 214, 235, 260, 288 
History 183, 186 
Honorary Degrees 261 
Honours Degree 184 
Hostels 243 
House Property 269 
Incomes of Colleges 277-278 
Inter-Collegiate instruction 185, 

256 
James I. 196 
Keble College, meals in common 

245 
Laboratories 193, 260 
Language and Literature 190 
Law 186, 190, 194 
Lecturers 190, 193 
Lectureships 111 
Legislative Assembly 194 
Libraries 260 

Local Examination Delegacy 253 
M.A. Degree 240 
Mathematics 190, 193 
Mathematical and Experimental 

Sciences 183, 190 
Matriculations 189, 366 
Medicine 190, 194 
Moderations 4, 186, 188, 189 
Moral and Mental Sciences 183 
Music, Degrees in 366 



INDEX. 



891 



Oxford University — cant. 
Natural Science 193 
New College 7, 16, 107 
Non - Collegiate Students 110, 

242-243 
Organisation 254 
Pass Degree 184, 253-254 
Pass Examinations 184, 194 
Pattison's Scheme 181-185 
Pension Fund 261 
Poor Men 241-242 
Praelectorships 109 
Prize Fellowships 192 
Prize Scholarships 169, 170, 249 
Professors 87-89, 91, 109, 193, 

255 
Professorships 111 
Redistribution of Endowment 

Fund 175-181 
Registrar 259 
Research 90, 260, 366 
Responsions 4, 365, 366 
Scholarships 110, 169, 189, 234, 

247, 248 
Schools, Inspection and Exami- 
nation of 253 
Seminars 260 
Statutes, 150 
Studies, conflict of 186-188; 

arrangement of 189-191 
Subsidies to Education 167-172 
Teachers in Elementary and 

Secondary Schools 244, 250 
Tests 158 
Theology 190 
Tuition Fees 271 
Tutors 86-87, 190, 193 
Unattached Students 171, 255 
University Extension 234, 241 , 

243 
Vice-Chancellor 195, 259 
Visitation 196 
Visitors 196 

Women, Degrees for 261 
Working Classes 242 
Working Men's Colleges 234, 

244, 250 
Oxford in 1800 17 
Oxford University Gazette 236 n., 

289-291 



Palmer, Roundell (Lord Selborne) 

104, 219 
Palmerston, Lord 103, 133-135, 

198 
Paris University 2, 47 
Parker, Abp. 11 
Patronage 58 



Pattison, Mark 61-62, 67, 98-99, 
102 n., 109, 148, 157-159, 162-191, 
197, 208-211, 239 n., 241, 260, 264, 
292, 294, 298, 299 n., 308, 310, 
327, 332-333, 337, 354, 357, 360 

Peacock, Dean 13, 64, 72,80, 112, 
153 

Peel, Rt. Hon. Sir L. 153 

Peel, Sir Robert 202 

Pensioners 57 

Pension Fund 55 

Pensions 220 

Perjury 51, 5^ 

Peter Lombard 2, 3 

Philosophy 58 

Phillimore, Lord Chief Justice 137 

Philpott, Bp. (of Worcester) 219 

Play fair, Prof. 20, 23 n. 

Poetic 58 

Politics 30, 58 

Praelectors 8 

Preparatory School 101 

Price, Prof. Bonamy 57, 67, 85-94. 
131 n. 

Price, Bartholomew 206 

Price, L. L. 277 n., 280, 311 

Prizes 220 

Proctors 6, 7 

Professorial and Tutorial Teaching 
compared 56-57 

Professorial System 66, 69, 70 

Professoriate 5, 18, 45 

Professors 45, 72, 73, 74, 78 

Professorships 142, 220, 221, 266 

Property 268-270 

Pry me, Professor, M.P. for the 
Borough of Cambridge 60, 61, 
113n. 

Psychology 58 

Public Schools 101, 358 

Puritans 10 

Pusey, Dr. E. B. 85 



QuADlUVlUM 3, 4 

Quarterly Review 278-280, 310, 

331, 334 
Queen's Speech 211, 217 
Questionists 6, 34 



Radnor, Earl of 59, 60, 198, 199 
Rayleigh, Lord 206, 219 
Redesdale, Earl of 219 
Reformation 1 6 
Regius Professors 5, 18 
Residence 15 ; defined 348 
Responsions 4 
Restoration 16 
Rhetoric 30, 58 



392 



INDEX. 



Ridley, M. W. 219 
Ripon, Marquis of 202 
Romilly, Sir John, Attorney- 
General 112 
Roundell, C. S. 206 
Royal Charter 1 
Royal Commission (1872), Oxford 

and Cambridge, Report of 264- 

273 
Royal Commission on Secondary 

Education, 1895, Report of 330n., 

351n. 
Royal Commission on University 

Education in London, Report of 

342 n. 
Royal Letters Patent 1 
Russell, Lord John 104, 105, 133, 

136, 138-143, 145, 150, 159, 198, 

229. 236 



Salamanca 21 

Salisbury, Marquis of 202, 203, 

211-216, 217, 298 
Scholars 8 
Scholarships 142, 220, 221, 244, 

266, 267 
Secondary Education 294 ; Royal 

Commission on 351 n. ; Grant 

for 360 
Secondary Schools 356, 365 
Sedgwick, Prof. Adam 112 
Selborne, Lord 104, 219 
Sewell, Rev. William 67 
Smith, Prof. Goldwin 10, 13-15, 

63, 67, 97, 107, 144n., 191-196, 

197, 310, 327 
Smith, Prof. H. J. S. 219 
Smith, Rev. J. J. 363 
Smith, Rev. Sydney 20 
Sophista Generalis 29 
Stanley, Lord 153 
Stanley, Rev. A. P. 107, 143 
Statutes: Laudian 13, 44, 62; 

Founders' 59 ; Elizabethan 80, 

82; new 273 
Stephen, Sir Leslie 65, 67 
Stipends 229 
Stokes, Prof. 219 
Stocks and Shares 266, 269 
Stuart, John, M.P. 106 
Subscription 59, 198-199 
Summerhill, Lord 60 



Tait, Abp. 107, 216, 359 

Teacherships 266 

Teachers in Primary and Second- 
ary Schools 244 

Temple, Abp. 101 

Tennyson, Charles 302 

Terms 226 

Tests 112, 142, 151, 199, 200, 201, 
204, 225 

Theology 3, 63 

Thring, Lord Henry 137 

Tithe Rent Charges 266, 269 

Treason 51 

Trivium 3, 4 

Tripos : See Cambridge 

Trusts 215, 266 

Tutorial System 45, 47, 65, 66, 
69 

Tutors 8, 40, 46, 78 



Unattached Students 212, 220, 

359 
University Extension 68, 241 
University v. Colleges 42, 69-99 



Vaughan, Prof. H. H. 21 n., 85, 

109 
Vaughan, Rev. C. J. 153 
Vice-Chancellor 5, 11, 14, 49, 165, 

381 
Visitors 9 



Wallis, Dr. John 46 

Walpole, Rt. Hon. Spencer, M.P., 

141, 144, 201, 217 
Wellington, Duke of, Chancellor 

of Oxford University 105 
Wendeborn 16 
Whewell, Dr. W. 32-36, 38, 39, 

67, 75, 363 
Whitgift, Abp. 10 
Williams, Colonel 198 
Winchelsea, Earl of 146 
Wood, SirW. P., Vice-Chancellor 

153 
Wood, George, M.P. 198, 203 
Wratislaw, A. H. 78-80, 363 



D =9 0, 



Printed by W. Heffer & Sons Ltd., 104 Hills Road, Cambridge. 




V* 





















/" 





























'^CT 



v N 



0° 
















V 

v 



j> * 









v* 









->\ 






V 



r ^o^ 



& ' 

/ 

o V 







: r*+* -.« 



^ 

•^ 



^ 



°o 



^ 






4° 
c 



*°-v -j 









o '* ,^ 



V 



V 

































X ^ 



cr 






% J ; >. ** / :f- 



<, 



4? 



1 . 



> v "* 






( 



v-o' 



' o 



& 

































W 















OOBBS BROJ. 



^> 



^ 






A 



.^ 



S ^AUCUSTINE 
32084 



'I* 









^' 






r > 






"'-^^ c>' 



.c,,r 



